Going full Leica...

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the M lenses are perfect but the body :-(  why dont you get  a SL ? a pro camera

Because not all of us are EVF geeks....

[cirke]

Because not all of us are EVF geeks....

you mean  rangefinder geeks or collectors ... EVF is for normal photographers

Edited January 12, 2016 by erick

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

So they brought out the SL - just for you . We'll muddle on with our little toys, don't you worry.

[cirke]

So they brought out the SL - just for you . We'll muddle on with our little toys, don't you worry.

 

The SL is not  system ,   no Summilux with AF,  it's a body nearly alone with rings , in 5 years maybe but not now

[jaapv]

Tsk-tsk, you 'll have to focus manually then...- and that on a pro camera...

[jmahto]

Tsk-tsk, you 'll have to focus manually then...- and that on a pro camera...

One can simply employ a pro focus puller for MF lenses. Money can buy everything.

[hepcat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why not just use a radio trigger? I've never ever thought about using a PC sync cable.

 

I realise that for a full time professional's workflow, the Leica M is not the ideal tool, but for general portrait work that I do, I barely see much difference other than spending 1 more second focusing before a firing a few shots. I've gotten very efficient at focusing my M accurately in the year that I've owned. It's barely a problem, especially in a controlled environment like my studio.

 

I'll be getting the exact same photograph as in my example above with the M over the Sony and the Canon and the only actual difference is auto focus. Everything else is the same. I literally put the trigger in the hot shoe, set my exposure and focus and I get the same exact shot.

 

I absolutely love the file output using the M9P in the portrait studio, and I enjoy shooting it.  I have problems with parallax though, especially with the 90mm.   If I had an M I'd be using it exclusively.  Manual focus isn't a problem in the least, nor is manual exposure.  As a matter of fact, I shoot every camera I use that way in the studio anyway.  

 

 Unfortunately, I don't shoot enough studio portraiture to warrant the investment in an M when the $1200 X-T1 does an adequate job.  The files aren't as nice, but they're certainly sale-able.    The Visoflex III, while clunky, provides the perfect platform for both the 65mm and 90mm lenses; but it also covers the hot shoe.  That necessitates jury-rigging a special flash cord for the hot shoe.   I have a prototype that I've never completed.  It's not possible to use a radio trigger with the Visoflex III installed.

 

The bottom line for me is that the X-T1 (or an M) with live-view and an open hot shoe are just faster and more convenient.   If Leica had just provided a PC sync outlet on the M9, there wouldn't have been any issues at all using the M9 in the studio.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

the M lenses are perfect but the body :-(  why dont you get  a SL ? a pro camera

 

I think the Op already said he's using the M because he a) already owns it, enjoys shooting with the M c) wants a lighter system than the SL would give him.

 

I actually read the original post as a statement of intent rather than a request for advice. Then he asked for other who might have experience with using an M for portraits to share their experiences.

 

As someone who does also own and use the SL I don't see any significant advantages over the M for portraits except if one uses the Noctilux wide open. It has precision framing and ISO 50. That's offset by slower manual focus most of the time and the wide open DSLR through the viewfinder look, which I don't enjoy. Also the SL has major issues with it's flash protocols, especially in A mode and about a third of the battery life of the M.

 

Gordon

[DirkR440]

I'm enjoying it a lot to use the M in a studio. Usually you have enough light and non or slow moving "targets" and you have a lot of time for taking pictures. Let's compare it for example to use an M at christmas time, low light, children running around very fast... that is more a challenge for me. :-)

 

Unfortunately not very often I have the chance to take pictures in a studio, but for example last time I've been able to make pictures like this with the M-P and the 90mm APO:

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Peter Kilmister]

Beautiful picture!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I absolutely love the file output using the M9P in the portrait studio, and I enjoy shooting it.  I have problems with parallax though, especially with the 90mm.   If I had an M I'd be using it exclusively.  Manual focus isn't a problem in the least, nor is manual exposure.  As a matter of fact, I shoot every camera I use that way in the studio anyway.  

 

 Unfortunately, I don't shoot enough studio portraiture to warrant the investment in an M when the $1200 X-T1 does an adequate job.  The files aren't as nice, but they're certainly sale-able.    The Visoflex III, while clunky, provides the perfect platform for both the 65mm and 90mm lenses; but it also covers the hot shoe.  That necessitates jury-rigging a special flash cord for the hot shoe.   I have a prototype that I've never completed.  It's not possible to use a radio trigger with the Visoflex III installed.

 

The bottom line for me is that the X-T1 (or an M) with live-view and an open hot shoe are just faster and more convenient.   If Leica had just provided a PC sync outlet on the M9, there wouldn't have been any issues at all using the M9 in the studio.

 

Why not just shoot a bit loose and crop in post? I've always shot portraits with the intent that they may need to be cropped to different formats. So I generally leave enough room for a 1:1 crop, which requires the most space. That means I need to leave a bit of room on the sides anyway. The M9 has more than enough resolution to allow shooting like this.

 

Gordon

[Nick Bedford]

Beautiful picture!

 

Agreed

 

I think the Op already said he's using the M because he a) already owns it, enjoys shooting with the M c) wants a lighter system than the SL would give him.

 

I actually read the original post as a statement of intent rather than a request for advice. Then he asked for other who might have experience with using an M for portraits to share their experiences.

 

As someone who does also own and use the SL I don't see any significant advantages over the M for portraits except if one uses the Noctilux wide open. It has precision framing and ISO 50. That's offset by slower manual focus most of the time and the wide open DSLR through the viewfinder look, which I don't enjoy. Also the SL has major issues with it's flash protocols, especially in A mode and about a third of the battery life of the M.

 

Gordon

 

I've actually done some tests to figure out where the edge of the digital file ends in regards to the thick white framing lines in the rangefinder on the M. It turns out that the outer edge of the white lines is the edge of the frame, so I can still frame quick accurately.

 

Because not all of us are EVF geeks....

 

And why can't the M be a professional's camera? Whether my camera has autofocus or an EVF doesn't change anything about how I light, compose and interact with my subject to get the desired results. But if it does, then maybe you have more problems than just gear (to be more blunt than I prefer to be).

 

Do you think this photograph would be better if I had used a big cumbersome annoying DSLR?

 

Edited January 12, 2016 by nickjbedford

[pico]

Beautiful picture!

 

A picture of a beautiful woman is not necessarily a beautiful picture.

Pretty women are a dime a dozen.

.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

A picture of a beautiful woman is not necessarily a beautiful picture.

Pretty women are a dime a dozen.

.

 

 

Comments like this annoy me. Unnecessary, unhelpful and borderline insulting.

 

A photograph of a beautiful woman does not mean it's not a beautiful photograph either. Interpretation of what is and isn't beautiful is really a personal decision. If someone thinks a picture is beautiful, then, to them, it is. You may not like this photo, which is a perfectly valid choice. . You could have pointed out what you feel could be improved or why it doesn't tickle your fancy. A quote followed by a sweeping statement just looks like a personal attack, to me.

 

Comments like yours are why other Leica owners I know won't participate here and when I read this type of pointless trolling I sometimes want to join them.

 

Gordon

[Peter H]

Comments like this annoy me. Unnecessary, unhelpful and borderline insulting.

 

A photograph of a beautiful woman does not mean it's not a beautiful photograph either. Interpretation of what is and isn't beautiful is really a personal decision. If someone thinks a picture is beautiful, then, to them, it is. You may not like this photo, which is a perfectly valid choice. . You could have pointed out what you feel could be improved or why it doesn't tickle your fancy. A quote followed by a sweeping statement just looks like a personal attack, to me.

 

Comments like yours are why other Leica owners I know won't participate here and when I read this type of pointless trolling I sometimes want to join them.

 

Gordon

 

 

 

But, and there's always a but...

 

 

If we restrict our comments to compliments, we get very little that's meaningful. It's a very real issue on this forum, and it's another reason why some people don't post photos here.

 

We ought to be able to accommodate both positive as well as negative comments.  No need for rudeness I agree, but a bit more honesty should be welcome. It's true that some people find it hard to make their criticism sound constructive, but should we really be quite so sensitive? 

[Peter Kilmister]

A quote from A.A. Milne might break this up for a while, "Yes," said Eeyore. "However," he said, brightening up a little, "we haven't had an earthquake lately."

 

There are people in life that are happy and there are Eeyores. Pico seems to be in Pooh Corner at the moment. Perhaps he's best left there until spring?

[Nick Bedford]

Critics don't help anyone, critique and suggestions do. I always welcome it myself, as long as its actually going to help me improve or learn something.

 

While this is a good portrait, the lighting is, I think, less refined than it could be. The key light revealed in her necklace might work better if it came from higher above, revealing a more natural shading of her face. We are used to seeing people lit from above. It looks like you're already using a reflector or something from below for fill which is good. The other thing is that the bright spot on the right side of the background is somewhat distracting and might work better if the whole background was a similar shade of blue.

 

Does that help better than the rude comment above?

 

I'm enjoying it a lot to use the M in a studio. Usually you have enough light and non or slow moving "targets" and you have a lot of time for taking pictures. Let's compare it for example to use an M at christmas time, low light, children running around very fast... that is more a challenge for me. :-)

 

Unfortunately not very often I have the chance to take pictures in a studio, but for example last time I've been able to make pictures like this with the M-P and the 90mm APO:

Edited January 12, 2016 by nickjbedford

[Peter Kilmister]

A. A. Milne was never rude. Your comment is constructive.

[jaapv]

 

 

 

 

 

 

And why can't the M be a professional's camera? Whether my camera has autofocus or an EVF doesn't change anything about how I light, compose and interact with my subject to get the desired results. But if it does, then maybe you have more problems than just gear (to be more blunt than I prefer to be).

 

Do you think this photograph would be better if I had used a big cumbersome annoying DSLR?

Slightly gobsmacked at this conclusion; maybe you should reread the exchange between Erick and me, which was not about DSLRs but about Erick's rather pronounced preference for EVFs...(and not about you either)

I think I have used more M cameras in more situations than you can imagine. Wrong  remark at the wrong person, I fear. Better start being blunt after you get a feeling for the forum. Nice photograph BTW. Photographs do not depend on gear, they depend on the photographer and the way he uses his gear to answer your question.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Nick Bedford]

Sorry, I should have made clear that my being blunt was more directed at those who think it isn't a camera worth using for portraits, not you! (and thanks about the photo)

 

"You" meant "people in general".

 

Slightly gobsmacked at this conclusion; maybe you should reread the exchange between Erick and me, which was not about DSLRs but about Erick's rather pronounced preference for EVFs...(and not about you either)

I think I have used more M cameras in more situations than you can imagine. Wrong  remark at the wrong person, I fear. Better start being blunt after you get a feeling for the forum. Nice photograph BTW.

 

Edited January 12, 2016 by nickjbedford