Peter H Posted December 2, 2015 Share #81 Posted December 2, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I read dunk's report in totally the opposite way - it will be the knob fiddlers who will create the images out of the computer files created with a focus free, unlimited DR device, operated by an unskilled, thought-free "photographer"! Post processing rules! There's a very real sense in which All photography is post-processing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 Hi Peter H, Take a look here Leica SL a real camera for the pro.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ramarren Posted December 2, 2015 Share #82 Posted December 2, 2015 Reading through this thread again ... All I can say is that when I exit my current career (retire, that is, hopefully within the next year) and return to doing photography as my income source (photography plus retirement income is an ideal mix for my favored photographic endeavors ), the SL and the M-P will be the basis of my photographic work. That work has always had a bit of diversity to it ... the M handles some of it well, some of it not at all where the SL will handle all of it, and some of it on par with or better than anything else. That's all I need to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted December 2, 2015 Share #83 Posted December 2, 2015 We're getting a bit 'off topic' with this discussion. dunk Odd That's never happened before Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 2, 2015 Share #84 Posted December 2, 2015 Reading through this thread again ... All I can say is that when I exit my current career (retire, that is, hopefully within the next year) and return to doing photography as my income source (photography plus retirement income is an ideal mix for my favored photographic endeavors ), the SL and the M-P will be the basis of my photographic work. That work has always had a bit of diversity to it ... the M handles some of it well, some of it not at all where the SL will handle all of it, and some of it on par with or better than anything else. That's all I need to know. Taking the thread further off- topic I suppose, I'd be interested to know what the M can't handle at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 2, 2015 Share #85 Posted December 2, 2015 Taking the thread further off- topic I suppose, I'd be interested to know what the M can't handle at all. Some examples on my website. Too many to post here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 2, 2015 Share #86 Posted December 2, 2015 Some examples on my website. Too many to post here. Long lens work? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share #87 Posted December 2, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) We all know about the billion pixel black carbon sensor, probably make some forms of zoom obsolete..... But if we are all wearing google glasses and our whole life is videoed then you can always grab a still from anywhere that you were looking. The good news is that if film stays around then our lenses will too, so that's still a long term bet .... Another reason not to sell my MP., Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 2, 2015 Share #88 Posted December 2, 2015 I don't spend too much time fretting about what technology is coming around the corner. In technology terms, my M3 and M-A are archaic. I don't use them a lot, as I'm lazy when it comes to developing film, and I don't get a lot of time to take pictures. The he appeal to me has always been the image, however it is achieved. The M has real limitations, which the SL will manage nicely, and my smal, beautiful M cameras will be there when I really don't want (need) the SL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 2, 2015 Share #89 Posted December 2, 2015 ................... .................. The M has real limitations, which the SL will manage nicely, .................... In that case it's an easy decision for you, which is a nice position to find yourself in. Congratulations! But all cameras have strengths and limitations, and all cameras are compromises, even those ridiculously sold as being "without compromise". It all comes down to your personal style of photography. But I am a bit baffled and genuinely surprised, having seen the truly spectacular range of photos that the digital Ms have produced over recent years, to discover how limited some users have been finding it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 2, 2015 Share #90 Posted December 2, 2015 Well Peter I like to have a nice Means to achieve the best possible End . . . but truth to tell it seems extremely rare for the Means to impose any kind of limitation on the End Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 2, 2015 Share #91 Posted December 2, 2015 Long lens work? Long lens and off-center focus point of active subject. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 2, 2015 Share #92 Posted December 2, 2015 I don't spend too much time fretting about what technology is coming around the corner. In technology terms, my M3 and M-A are archaic. I don't use them a lot, as I'm lazy when it comes to developing film, and I don't get a lot of time to take pictures. The he appeal to me has always been the image, however it is achieved. The M has real limitations, which the SL will manage nicely, and my smal, beautiful M cameras will be there when I really don't want (need) the SL. I have far more personal limitations that affect my photography than technical limitations that affect my M. "Curing" the M's limitations with an SL (what are those terrible limitations anyhow?) will not change my skills. As I see it The SL is not in way way an improved M, "fixing" its limitations, but rather simply a different beast than an M, with its own different limitations. Frankly John, by omitting features that allow the full use of digital technology, your M60 has more limitations than an M. Yet you presumably enjoy it and get results that please you, so I am not sure what camera "limitations" mean to you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted December 2, 2015 Share #93 Posted December 2, 2015 Taking the thread further off- topic I suppose, I'd be interested to know what the M can't handle at all. A bit of hyperbole, for sure, since an M-P is actually a TTL viewing camera with its Live View capability—you can bend it to use for lots of stuff that it might not be the ideal camera for. However, I find an M to be rather clumsy to use for tabletop, macro, long telephoto, fast action (as in sports and some wildlife work), etc. I find it best to use for people photos, some kinds of landscape, and a range of still life endeavors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 3, 2015 Share #94 Posted December 3, 2015 In that case it's an easy decision for you, which is a nice position to find yourself in. Congratulations! But all cameras have strengths and limitations, and all cameras are compromises, even those ridiculously sold as being "without compromise". It all comes down to your personal style of photography. But I am a bit baffled and genuinely surprised, having seen the truly spectacular range of photos that the digital Ms have produced over recent years, to discover how limited some users have been finding it. Now, don't be churlish - it doesn't suit you. The limitations (and strengths) of the M have been apparent from the start. Perfect 28-90. Outside that range, not so much. Not weather sealed (I can't believe we're doing this again), no AF (useful in some circumstances). I know you take a different view, but that does not justify scorn on validly held, but differing views. The SL is an effective electronic Leica implementation, where for me, the M(240) is not. Never bought one. Not interested. Don't be so ungraceous to want the SL to fail, or to mock the reasons people may want one. I'm quite sure I've explained my reasons at tedious length already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 3, 2015 Share #95 Posted December 3, 2015 I have far more personal limitations that affect my photography than technical limitations that affect my M. "Curing" the M's limitations with an SL (what are those terrible limitations anyhow?) will not change my skills. As I see it The SL is not in way way an improved M, "fixing" its limitations, but rather simply a different beast than an M, with its own different limitations. Frankly John, by omitting features that allow the full use of digital technology, your M60 has more limitations than an M. Yet you presumably enjoy it and get results that please you, so I am not sure what camera "limitations" mean to you. I'm sorry, Alan, but your post completely baffles me. Who said the SL "fixes" the M? They both have different strengths and weaknesses. My M60 is an M, playing to the strengths that make the M a truly great camera - the optical viewfinder. You seem to be suggesting that I bought the M60 to create limitations, that enhance weaknesses in the M so I could justify buying an SL (that doesn't make sense to me even as I write it). Let's not rehearse the myriad reasons why I did not want the M(240) and the M60 meets my needs. That is an entirely tiresome exchange. Let's put this another way - if the M(240) with its EVF and video, live view etc does it for you, that's fine. To me, those half baked clip ons spoil an otherwise very nice camera, and the SL, not being constrained by the M form factor and optical viewfinder is a perfect complement to the FOUR M cameras I have, and use (when I get the time). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 3, 2015 Share #96 Posted December 3, 2015 IkarusJohn, on 03 Dec 2015 - 10:00, said:IkarusJohn, on 03 Dec 2015 - 10:00, said: Now, don't be churlish - it doesn't suit you. The limitations (and strengths) of the M have been apparent from the start. Perfect 28-90. Outside that range, not so much. Not weather sealed (I can't believe we're doing this again), no AF (useful in some circumstances). I know you take a different view, but that does not justify scorn on validly held, but differing views. The SL is an effective electronic Leica implementation, where for me, the M(240) is not. Never bought one. Not interested. Errr. Not weather sealed? That was the M8/M9 series. The M is weathersealed. Yes - Leica claims the seal of the lens suffices to meet the norm. Without proof to the contrary... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 3, 2015 Share #97 Posted December 3, 2015 I'm sorry, Alan, but your post completely baffles me. Who said the SL "fixes" the M? They both have different strengths and weaknesses. My M60 is an M, playing to the strengths that make the M a truly great camera - the optical viewfinder. You seem to be suggesting that I bought the M60 to create limitations, that enhance weaknesses in the M so I could justify buying an SL (that doesn't make sense to me even as I write it). Let's not rehearse the myriad reasons why I did not want the M(240) and the M60 meets my needs. That is an entirely tiresome exchange. Let's put this another way - if the M(240) with its EVF and video, live view etc does it for you, that's fine. To me, those half baked clip ons spoil an otherwise very nice camera, and the SL, not being constrained by the M form factor and optical viewfinder is a perfect complement to the FOUR M cameras I have, and use (when I get the time). John, what I meant was some people's "limitatons" are other people's "features". No, I did not mean (or say) that you bought the M60 to "create limitations". I know that you liked the simplicity and lack of LCD. So for you the lack of an LCD is not a limitation but a "feature". For me, the lack of an LCD is a limitation. I wouldn't want a camera without a LCD, but you have extolled the virtues of not having it on your M60. The point is that to me the M60 is a limited camera, but not to you. The question to me is whether the camera limits you in the way you prefer to shoot. You also consider the video and live view on the M to be half baked clip ons, but they are built in and are also built in to the SL. If your point is the SL has better EVF, video and Liveview than the M, those are all true but you are comparing a new camera to one three years old. The technology has obviously moved forward with the SL, as one would expect. The SL looks very promising but the lenses are humungous (though the primes should be better than the zooms). The M to me is the right size and weight (with lenses). Yes, there is no built in EVF and you're right about that, but that is not what an M is (at least up to now) because the M almost by definition is an OVF camera. But I am not one of those who thinks the OVF is perfect and should never change. I would be delighted with a camera similar to a Q with a M mount -- even without autofocus. The SL isn't that. If the reports on M lenses on the SL are consistently good, I would consider a SL (but probably not SL lenses). But I will probably wait to see what Leica comes up with in the next iteration of the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted December 3, 2015 Author Share #98 Posted December 3, 2015 To come back to the topic, I visited the shop ten minutes ago. They could not show me the SL because it was sold... They said. I seriously began to doubt, if the shop had one in the first place...The least they could have done, was sent me a mail so that I would not have to take the trip to the shop.. Called the headquarter and was told they have sold the only camera they had and removed the Leica SL from their website ( ???) I wonder where the other professionals bought one, because this " one " is gone now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 3, 2015 Share #99 Posted December 3, 2015 John, what I meant was some people's "limitatons" are other people's "features". No, I did not mean (or say) that you bought the M60 to "create limitations". I know that you liked the simplicity and lack of LCD. So for you the lack of an LCD is not a limitation but a "feature". For me, the lack of an LCD is a limitation. I wouldn't want a camera without a LCD, but you have extolled the virtues of not having it on your M60. The point is that to me the M60 is a limited camera, but not to you. The question to me is whether the camera limits you in the way you prefer to shoot. You also consider the video and live view on the M to be half baked clip ons, but they are built in and are also built in to the SL. If your point is the SL has better EVF, video and Liveview than the M, those are all true but you are comparing a new camera to one three years old. The technology has obviously moved forward with the SL, as one would expect. The SL looks very promising but the lenses are humungous (though the primes should be better than the zooms). The M to me is the right size and weight (with lenses). Yes, there is no built in EVF and you're right about that, but that is not what an M is (at least up to now) because the M almost by definition is an OVF camera. But I am not one of those who thinks the OVF is perfect and should never change. I would be delighted with a camera similar to a Q with a M mount -- even without autofocus. The SL isn't that. If the reports on M lenses on the SL are consistently good, I would consider a SL (but probably not SL lenses). But I will probably wait to see what Leica comes up with in the next iteration of the M. Hi Alan, No, I'm not comparing the SL to the M at all. They are different cameras and different systems, with different complementary strengths. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 3, 2015 Share #100 Posted December 3, 2015 Errr. Not weather sealed? That was the M8/M9 series. The M is weathersealed. Yes - Leica claims the seal of the lens suffices to meet the norm. Without proof to the contrary... Come now, Jaap. Don't be a pedant, it doesn't make any useful contribution to the discussion. Only the M(240) (and M(240 series cameras, I assume - I'm not prepared to test my M60) is "weather sealed", whatever that means. As far as I'm aware, no M lens is, which rather defeats the purpose. Having seen a bottle of water poured over the SL with zoom attached, I wouldn't repeat that test with any of my M cameras (with lenses fitted). Feel free to repeat that test - please post a video here, and report on the repair bill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.