Can Never Go Back to DSLR

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There are action shots, and then there are stop-action shots. Each has it's applications. And there are combinations. Esthetically I find the latter frequently pleasing with people and animals. Often, the head moves less than the limbs, so accurate focus on the former and a slowish shutter speed to capture some motion blur on the latter makes for a nice shot. Whether focus was achieved by AF or manually is really irrelevant if the shot works. I used manual focus for decades prior to AF being invented, so it's not a feature I consider indispensible. I did ratioed fill-flash with manual and auto-thyristor flashes too, so smart flash wasn't that much of a godsend to me either. About the only modern feature I really find very useful is image stabilization, and even that I'm quite capable of doing without.

 

About the only feature of the Leica that's a deal breaker for me is the rangefinder. If not for that I wouldn't be still using the system.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hamey]

I appreciate your interest in trains, but where is the sense of speed in these shots? They could have been taken with the trains standing in the station. (except for a spot of motion blur in the trains themselves)

Panning could provide a solution.

I notice a very deep DOF as well, making focusing less relevant than shutter lag. Prefocusing would work perfectly.

 

Where is the sence of speed in these shots, Well Jaapv you either make a trip out there or take my word for it.

 

The M240 and Leica R shots are all prefocused, their approch speed is just to fast for me.

 

Panning could provide a solution, most train photographers like their train shots in focus however if I can

can find me a person to drive their motor car and pace at these speeds I would love to do some panning shots ...lol.

 

Going back to the OP post, this is one reason why I cannot give up my DSLR/SLR I feel the leica M is not really suitable for this kind of photography.

 

Ken

[howard_cummer]

David, I have done two African Safaris - one in Kenya and one in Tanzania - and two tiger shoots in India, Ranthambhore (twice) and Bandhavgarh (once). Depending on the images you want to capture, in my experience, if you want close up action shots of moving wild life then the best bet is an AF SLR with a long tele zoom. I use Nikons - D4 and D800E - and the Nikkor 80 - 400 VR zoom with 1.4 extender on the D4 and the 70 - 200 VR zoom with 1.4 extender on the D800E. I find, for what I want to capture, that combination produces the most "keepers". Here is a sample:

 

<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Howard+Cummer/Eagles2014/7340.jpg.html>

 

Good luck with the safari - it is a wonderful experience.

Howard

[tookaphotoof]

Ken, personally I find those two shots not too interesting because, even if you shot them whilst they were traveling at 300kph, I don't sense the speed in the photos itself. I have the same problem with a lot of 'bif' photos.

However, as long as you are happy with your shots it's fine as I also take photos to primarily please myself.

You probably won't like them, that's ok, too.

So many people, so many different opinions.

 

On topic, I'm not considering for a moment to go back to dslr.

However, I think it's a nice tool to use for the right moment (in my case).

[hamey]

They are basic shots that I enjoy taking, thought you're right they do not indicate trains travelling at high speed.

These shoots are for my own collection, my responce was mainly to prove the AF and IS was more suited in

Capturing high speed movement unless you're Doug Herr who is capable in manually focusing at high speed.

At 66 years my reflexes have slowed down so I really love the focusing aid these lenses give me.

 

Thats why I would never give up my D/SLR as it has so much advantages over my M240.

 

For those that have any doubt to what's it like check this.

 

 

 

Ken.

[jaapv]

Well, Ken, Doug is a master but I get quite a good hit rate with things like flying birds as well , and I can give you a couple of years.

For me MF works better as I am very particular about the point of focus -have to be with wildlife and farting around with focus points is too cumbersome.

aF struggles with fur too.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

David, I have done two African Safaris - one in Kenya and one in Tanzania - and two tiger shoots in India, Ranthambhore (twice) and Bandhavgarh (once). Depending on the images you want to capture, in my experience, if you want close up action shots of moving wild life then the best bet is an AF SLR with a long tele zoom. I use Nikons - D4 and D800E - and the Nikkor 80 - 400 VR zoom with 1.4 extender on the D4 and the 70 - 200 VR zoom with 1.4 extender on the D800E. I find, for what I want to capture, that combination produces the most "keepers". Here is a sample:

 

<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Howard+Cummer/Eagles2014/7340.jpg.html>

 

Good luck with the safari - it is a wonderful experience.

Howard

 

Matter of preference- I have about thirty Safaris under my belt

[AlanJW]

Yes, matter of preference -- and personal comfort level. If the OP is now more comfortable with his M and long lenses, I say great -- for him. I am a confirmed Leica rangefinder user, but when I went to the Galapagos 2 years ago, I took a D800e and a 28-300 Nikor (not known as one of Nikon's best but it did fine). The reason was I could not contemplate changing lenses on the fly in dusty sandy conditions, and the need for the 300mm reach. It turns out image stablization was critical too, especially for shots from a Zodiac bobbing around in the water. The results were pretty good, (see for yourself in the Galapagos gallery in the link in my signature) and I would do the same in similar circumstances (such as a safari). because I do not want to have to learn all the techniques described here for using a manual system (rangefinder or DSLR) effectively in this kind of situation. I have great admiration for Doug's superb work but I couldn't do anything like that manually, and I have great admiration for Jaap using long lenses on safari with a M. That's just not something I could do either. That's why I still have a D800e.

 

Being a Leica devotee does not mean you should use the wrong tool for a job, and the right tool is dependent on what you are comfortable with. I think staying in your equipment comfort zone is important to allowing you to think properly about what you are trying to capture.

[bocaburger]

My trip to the Galapagos was the experience of a lifetime! Two other members of our party were serious photo hobbyists shooting manual-focus SLRs. When we got back we all got together for a slide show. My Nikon F5 shots were the one's that knocked everyone's socks off. Everyone thought it was because of the F5's "advanced" AF and 8fps motor drive. But in reality I had it on single-shot drive the whole time (any sequences I did with quick button presses), and gave up on the AF almost from the beginning (mainly because the 80-200/2.8 I was using had the drive-shaft-and-key AF mechanism that was slower than I could turn the ring manually.

 

The problem I would've had with a Leica at the time would have been the limited focal length of 135mm (without resorting to a Visoflex) coupled with the tiny finder frame for it.

 

I'm sure my 911 has more than enough grunt to pull a boat trailer (putting aside wear and tear on the clutch), and that my mechanic could weld a frame hitch to it if I wanted. But I've never seen anyone do it (not saying nobody ever has) and I'm not tempted. Nor have I ever been tempted to track an SUV on a race course