70mm vs the M 50mm Apo

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, maybe you should read the forum more widely - he is a world-renown wildlife and bird photographer, active on this forum. And from my own experience I can say that it is no problem to get good wildlife and bird shots using a Leica. And I shot Canon before, in case you want to ask. That remark about it being difficult is bollocks. I bet you 99% of photographers in general are not using Leica. Why should wildlife be different? Well, with an S - yes - it lacks long lenses.

jaapv my point is 99% of wildlife photographers don't use a Leica ...... Correct or not?

Of course there will be some Leica owners that want to go out and try there hand at wildlife photography and that's fantastic........ I know I did

But in reality shooting small birds with a 600mm f4 lens with a D4s or equivalent body would be the smarter thing to do........ Kind of using the right tool for the job.

Now then, shooting wildlife in a zoo or nature park is a different kettle of fish but I am talking about wildlife running around the african savanna.

In September I am taking my S to Svalblad and hope to get some polar bears and warisis with it but I will also have Mr Nikon with me as a back up.

I did just look at that Herr guys pictures...... He's got some nice pictures there

[Deliberate1]

For anyone considering buying the S system over the M system or just another camera to use with the M system "I personally" found the move a good one.

 

Neil,

At the risk of proclaiming true love during the infatuation stage, I am inclined to agree.

Today was my first day shooting with my new S 006/70mm. Like you, I have struggled with focusing challenges for four yeas with an M9. The auto focus is a revelation. It removes a technical hurdle between me and my image that I did not fully appreciate until today. The full size OVF is extraordinary. The first time I looked through it I felt I was at a movie theater looking up at a huge screen. Remarkable. I can wear my glasses and do not have to smoosh my nose against the eyepiece with the inevitable nose grease that constantly sullied my M screen. I never appreciated how slow my M was on start up until I witnessed the S. I have not see any of the images on a monitor. Nevertheless, the auto white balance (at least with jpg) is so much more accurate than my experience with the M9. Dead on, in fact. With the M, I always assumed that I would have to work the color on most if not all the images. Consequently, I had read reports that S images required no pp color correction with skepticism. Granted, after just a handful of images, I can not verify it, but there is truth to it. I am aware of the reported ISO limitations. But I did some product shots of my wife's handmade baskets in waning natural light at 800 and was shocked at the quality. Reading camera manuals tests my patience, and so I have merely skimmed it, But the layout of the controls is so intuitive that I suspect I can learn most of what I need to know just by exploring the menus. 

For four and a half years I coveted my M9 . It was my only camera. When I was good and it was good, the images were exceptional, But, with just one day with the S, I can already see that this camera is in a different league. I believe that we will be very happy together.

David 

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Neil,

At the risk of proclaiming true love during the infatuation stage, I am inclined to agree.

Today was my first day shooting with my new S 006/70mm. Like you, I have struggled with focusing challenges for four yeas with an M9. The auto focus is a revelation. It removes a technical hurdle between me and my image that I did not fully appreciate until today. The full size OVF is extraordinary. The first time I looked through it I felt I was at a movie theater looking up at a huge screen. Remarkable. I can wear my glasses and do not have to smoosh my nose against the eyepiece with the inevitable nose grease that constantly sullied my M screen. I never appreciated how slow my M was on start up until I witnessed the S. I have not see any of the images on a monitor. Nevertheless, the auto white balance (at least with jpg) is so much more accurate than my experience with the M9. Dead on, in fact. With the M, I always assumed that I would have to work the color on most if not all the images. Consequently, I had read reports that S images required no pp color correction with skepticism. Granted, after just a handful of images, I can not verify it, but there is truth to it. I am aware of the reported ISO limitations. But I did some product shots of my wife's handmade baskets in waning natural light at 800 and was shocked at the quality. Reading camera manuals tests my patience, and so I have merely skimmed it, But the layout of the controls is so intuitive that I suspect I can learn most of what I need to know just by exploring the menus. 

For four and a half years I coveted my M9 . It was my only camera. When I was good and it was good, the images were exceptional, But, with just one day with the S, I can already see that this camera is in a different league. I believe that we will be very happy together.

David 

Your gonna get into trouble for that one David........................ only joking :)

The Die hard M users, will I am sure come back with the usual "size matters etc etc

 

But seriously the M system is a fantastic system for those who have no issues with the Rangefinder system (and cant lift heavy weights :)  ) The S system, that is now more affordable is fantastic for those of us that are unfortunate to have deteriorating eyesight and who regularly go to the gym :)

All of the above is a win win situation

[Jeff S]

Nobody here is dissing the S and its potential advantages.  I shot film with 35mm, medium format, and up to 8x10 view camera, and the benefits of added negative real estate were stunning and obvious in print.  The gap between 35mm and medium format digital has narrowed considerably compared to film counterparts, and not just using Leica.  Sure, there are differences, and to use the worn out phrase, horses for courses.  

 

But, above and beyond those differences, your main issue with the M was not with the camera, but with your own focussing abilities (and/or calibration).   If you had put the M on a tripod with LV and compared it  to the S, and printed at same size, your comments would be more objective; otherwise, you are the issue, less so the camera.

 

Jeff

[platypus]

Yes

 

sollicita es questus amet     Ooops! what I mean't to say was this: I am so grateful that, at my relatively advanced age, I am still able to quickly (and sharply) focus with my M cameras. Thank you Lord!

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

sollicita es questus amet     Ooops! what I mean't to say was this: I am so grateful that, at my relatively advanced age, I am still able to quickly (and sharply) focus with my M cameras. Thank you Lord!

No need to be condescending now........................you know my German is not that good

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nobody here is dissing the S and its potential advantages.  I shot film with 35mm, medium format, and up to 8x10 view camera, and the benefits of added negative real estate were stunning and obvious in print.  The gap between 35mm and medium format digital has narrowed considerably compared to film counterparts, and not just using Leica.  Sure, there are differences, and to use the worn out phrase, horses for courses.  

 

But, above and beyond those differences, your main issue with the M was not with the camera, but with your own focussing abilities (and/or calibration).   If you had put the M on a tripod with LV and compared it  to the S, and printed at same size, your comments would be more objective; otherwise, you are the issue, less so the camera.

 

Jeff

No exactly true Jeff...................Yes I had an issue focusing with the M and the MM (that doesn't have LV) but I like the way that the Leica's renders the colors so decided to get the S when I could have quite easily got a HB or a Phase One

At the end of the day, due to no fault of anyone's the M became a chore for me to use so I changed.

[Jeff S]

I don't see anything in your comments that contradicts my points.  

 

You say nobody's fault, but "the M became a chore"?   One reason people use an M is that it's simple, not a chore....unless they can't see or learn to use the RF.  If so, one shouldn't conclude that the results are inherently poor; that's on the user.

 

Jeff

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

 

 

You say nobody's fault, but "the M became a chore"?   One reason people use an M is that it's simple, not a chore....unless they can't see or learn to use the RF.  If so, one shouldn't conclude that the results are inherently poor; that's on the user.

 

Jeff

Cool

[platypus]

No need to be condescending now........................you know my German is not that good

Now Neil, we both know how much you enjoy a good bit of condescension 

[Printmaker]

Do you ever go out with both the S and the M? If so, how do you use them in these situations?

Yes. I shot a fashion show last week and took both but ended up shooting everything with my Monochrom due to the low light level. Sometimes I take my M9 with a 21 along with the S2/70. It is not all that often I need the 21 but it is good to have when I do.

 

I think that if I shot with the S 007, I'd have less need of the Monochrom due to the higher ISO and higher frame rate. But I don't think I'd ever part with either my M9 or Monochrom. 

[skimmel]

Yes. I shot a fashion show last week and took both but ended up shooting everything with my Monochrom due to the low light level. Sometimes I take my M9 with a 21 along with the S2/70. It is not all that often I need the 21 but it is good to have when I do.

 

I think that if I shot with the S 007, I'd have less need of the Monochrom due to the higher ISO and higher frame rate. But I don't think I'd ever part with either my M9 or Monochrom. 

 

Thanks.  Would love to see some of your work.

[Printmaker]

No need to be condescending now........................you know my German is not that good

It has been 50 years since I cracked that book but I think that is a Latin quote.

[Printmaker]

Thanks.  Would love to see some of your work.

There are a few shots on this S forum under Black and white file conversions. 

[tom0511]

As a user of both systems I dont think one can do alot with both

of course the S is bigger but one still can use it for street or for casual shooting as well.

 

I have used M for 30 years and think im am good at rangefinder focusing. I also mainly use newer M lenses which do not suffer from focus shift. IMO the M works best for 35 and 50mm, thats where the viewfinder and rangefinder work great.

For shallow DOF portrait kind of photography I find the S with unen for AF (or MF) easier to nail.

And I agree that even though M files are great I find the S to have another color/tone transition, and also a different type of bokeh, and another level of sharpness. Maybe the MM is closest.

 

I use the S quite often "untypical" for family and casual shooting and love the images.

I also like the pure approach of the M, the camera does not distract you from the subject.

 

By the way - for people who want AF but do not want the size of the S and dont need 36mp the T system works quite well too.

 

[skimmel]

There are a few shots on this S forum under Black and white file conversions. 

 

Awesome, thanks!

[BerndReini]

I have been strangely tempted by the S-system again lately. The reason is that I have been looking at the results of the new SL and then I start looking at used S-prices and all of a sudden this becomes a real temptation. Now, I have to be honest with myself though and admit that I just wouldn't be using an S enough to justify it.

I owned a P25 back for my Contax 645. It was limited by its low ISO but the huge CCD sensor (almost full 645) created beautiful images. I held on to it for almost two years before selling it early this year. Like other people I thought it could replace 4x5 for me, but it really didn't at all. When I shoot 4x5, I almost always use some rise and fall adjustments because I just love the formality of the photographs I get when correcting for perspective. It also makes shooting a very deliberate process and I realized that my film and processing cost for this kind of work are about the price of a battery and a lens cap for the S-system. I own a full set of lenses for 4x5, anything from 75mm to 300mm, and no lens cost me more than $400. 

 

The M system combined with 4x5 film really makes the most sense for my kind of work, but I certainly acknowledge that other photographers have different requirements.

[Jeff S]

 

The M system combined with 4x5 film really makes the most sense for my kind of work, but I certainly acknowledge that other photographers have different requirements.

I know others that do the same.....I'd be doing this, too, if I still had my darkroom.

 

Given your style and preferences, I think you might be better served waiting for S007 prices to similarly drop so that you could use LV in conjunction with a PC lens (the prior CCD versions of course lack LV).  But that's assuming you'd want to emulate your large format approach in the digital realm.  

 

Jeff

[Printmaker]

... The M system combined with 4x5 film really makes the most sense for my kind of work, but I certainly acknowledge that other photographers have different requirements.

That is how I operated for quite a few years. I sold my Hasselblad system about 15 years ago and bought a PhaseOne back for my Linhof. Two years later I added a Toyo View with a BetterLight scanback. I used this setup for 90% of my studio work with a Nikon D2/60 reserved for catalog work. I found that I was just too busy to shoot catalogs about 7 years ago and stopped doing catalogs. I slimmed down to just the Toyo/BetterLight and M8. My studio workload kept growing so I added a S2 to speed things up. Now, a few months into retirement, I'm happily shooting with the S2 and a M9 and MM. Should I feel the need for swings and tilts, I'll pick up a Sinar p3 MF-L. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

 

The M system combined with 4x5 film really makes the most sense for my kind of work, but I certainly acknowledge that other photographers have different requirements.

I neglected to mention that while I no longer shoot 4x5 with an M system, I did just that for several decades (along with medium format) when all my work was film and darkroom.  Once switching to digital in 2009, all cameras larger than 35mm were sold.  

 

Fortunately, though, the discipline instilled using large format has remained even using digital Ms....I highly recommend it for any photographer...for discipline and learning to see, not just for IQ.

 

Jeff