ECohen Posted January 13, 2016 Share #41 Posted January 13, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) "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)." It can, You choose the tool to do the job. If all you shoot is portrait's or things that you plan the M's a fine tool.....its a fine wedding camera What if a zoom is needed and your client decides "lets try some action shots"? How a both a long telephoto for this shot? You may want to rethink the M as the only tool in your box. A DSLR is far more versatile tool not to mention a very cost effective in terms of building a system. As a professional you need to be able to handle many different situations......unless you are one of the fortunate few to not have clients give you direction I think that's all this group is saying. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Hi ECohen, Take a look here Going full Leica.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nick Bedford Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share #42 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) And I'm right there with you. I've shot a few weddings and I'd never use a manual focus M as the main camera. Not practical. "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)." It can, You choose the tool to do the job. If all you shoot is portrait's or things that you plan the M's a fine tool.....its a fine wedding camera What if a zoom is needed and your client decides "lets try some action shots"? How a both a long telephoto for this shot? You may want to rethink the M as the only tool in your box. A DSLR is far more versatile tool not to mention a very cost effective in terms of building a system. As a professional you need to be able to handle many different situations......unless you are one of the fortunate few to not have clients give you direction I think that's all this group is saying. Edited January 13, 2016 by nickjbedford Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 13, 2016 Share #43 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) 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. I correct my comment. The woman is not beautiful; the exposure, light temperature, composition and makeup suck, too. Happy to annoy you. . Edited January 13, 2016 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted January 13, 2016 Share #44 Posted January 13, 2016 I correct my comment. The woman is not beautiful; the exposure, light temperature, composition and makeup suck, too. Happy to annoy you. . Wow you you need to put down the camera an enjoy the scenery....even if the exposure was off by 3 stops ....thats a pretty girl Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Bedford Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share #45 Posted January 13, 2016 Nothing like an M... 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted January 13, 2016 Share #46 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) And I'm right there with you. I've shot a few weddings and I'd never use a manual focus M as the main camera. Not practical. Some photographers choose zooms. Some prefer all primes. Some mix it up. Some photographer shoot weddings with nothing more than a 35mm and an 85mm. Some have everything from 12mm to 500mmm and a lighting guy/gal in tow. Some like OVF's or EVF's or Rangefinders, even. And it follows that some wedding photographers prefer manual focus lenses. Personally, in a dim reception, I find autofocus slow and impractical. And a DSLR OVF even more so. Even the current low light king the Sony A7S can't focus as fast or reliably in a dim reception as I can with a M-P. It's really up to the individual to decide what's practical for their individual needs, IMHO. If you were to google "Leica Wedding Photographers" I think you'll find there are actually quite a few full time wedding photographers shooting exclusively with the M and many who don't. And just because 80% shoot with Canikon doesn't make the rest who shoot with Fuji, or Olympus or Sony or even Leica a lesser choice for those people. Choice is wonderful, I think. Gordon p.s. I shot weddings for a couple of years exclusively with my M's. Had a great time and no one ever asked me where my 300mm was. Edited January 13, 2016 by FlashGordonPhotography 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted January 13, 2016 Share #47 Posted January 13, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I correct my comment. The woman is not beautiful; the exposure, light temperature, composition and makeup suck, too. Happy to annoy you. . Carry on Pico.... I do wonder how many think your comments probably say more about you than the girl or the photo though? Gordon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 13, 2016 Share #48 Posted January 13, 2016 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 When I (rarely) read other forums I find this to be true... lots of folks make disparaging comments about this forum and feel more comfortable in less challenging and less intellectual forums like DPReview. Many on other forums can't run here with the big dogs. And, as you can see by Pico's avatar... he's a big dog! Carry on Pico.... I do wonder how many think your comments probably say more about you than the girl or the photo though? Gordon Gordon - Everything, anyone writes here says something about them, even you... and me. Pico did not make a comment about the person posting, only about the post (photo). Yet, you somehow feel compelled to making comments about Pico, the person. So, back to your own observation, what do your comments say about you? Rick p.s. Don't leave here like the other Leica owners you know... you're a big dog and I'd miss reading your posts. Arf! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted January 13, 2016 Share #49 Posted January 13, 2016 Everybody's idea of beauty varies, people's views on even a good and possibly great photograph varies.. I used M's and R6.2 with various lenses for weddings, no complaints from either the happy couples or my co workers on the results.. Know your equipment.. And just as important know your job... I love Pico's comments, confirms my personal view that he is a wonderful old fuddy duddy! '()' .... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 13, 2016 Share #50 Posted January 13, 2016 Most of the 'big' dogs here bark, they don't bite, nip you, or even snarl. More of a puppy fest than anything else... Even if Pico was right that the pics suck, its besides the point, they still might have sucked if they were taken with a DSLR. Showing a pic online to prove that a camera is suited for portraits is useless. If others are willing to pay for prints then obviously the camera is fine. If you are doing it just for yourself, then check the prints, and figure out if you are happy with them or not. But then again, I am not a pack animal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soden Posted January 13, 2016 Share #51 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) My take on this topic is that a camera is a tool, nothing more! It's up to the photographer to decide if it's the right tool or not. For me, I would rather learn one system completely than to learn multiple systems. An example is the notion that you can't use a M9 with a Visoflex III and wireless flash. Well you can! I have, you just get a low profile flash adapter and hang your pocket wizard off of that. Works well, simple. In use you don't get TTL but if you pick up a sekonic light meter with the pocket wizard module that becomes a non issue. For me, my M can be used for any photographic purpose, it's up to my creativity to make it work. I know to some it's easier to just pick up a different camera, one with auto this or auto that, but to me your loosing half the fun. And in the end having a computer take the photo is not as creative as you taking it. Edited January 13, 2016 by Soden Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted January 13, 2016 Share #52 Posted January 13, 2016 My take is that the photographer is a tool. The camera is a vector. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soden Posted January 13, 2016 Share #53 Posted January 13, 2016 My take is that the photographer is a tool. The camera is a vector. Spoken like a true professional. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 13, 2016 Share #54 Posted January 13, 2016 Go for it. Dumped all my non-Leica gear and don't regret it. There ARE issues with going RF only ...... but nothing you cannot work around... and sometimes having to think a bit first helps creativity and forces you to do things differently. To use a cooking analogy ..... you can get by and cook great food with just a few knives and pots and pans ....... but like in photography, if you hit a minor problem the answer today seems to be 'buy a gadget that does it for you'.... or another gadget that does it better or quicker, so we all have cupboards full of gear that gets rarely used ..... and then you can't remember how it works so you would have been better off not bothering in the first place. Jane Bown used an OM-1 for 35yrs with no studio lighting and carried all her gear to shoots in a shopping bag ....... didn't stop her taking great portraits ...... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted January 13, 2016 Share #55 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) The M is a great portrait tool. It does have it's quirks some don't mind working with. There is a long list of well knowns who use them, though this is irrelevant - does it work for you? There is your answer. Pico is right - Photography of a beautiful woman does not mean good photography. There's eye candy, then there is photography and art. It's not something to be offended by, it's something to be aware of. Edited January 13, 2016 by Paul J 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 13, 2016 Share #56 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) Hahaha you crack me up Erick I agree ! this forum is really funny Edited January 13, 2016 by erick 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted January 13, 2016 Share #57 Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) My take is that the photographer is a tool. I can't even begin to tell you how many photographers I've met over the years that were 'tools.' But that 'nother whole topic... Edited January 13, 2016 by hepcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 13, 2016 Share #58 Posted January 13, 2016 Much as I like using rangefinders, personally they would not be my first choice of camera for studio portraiture. That said, if you are happy to use them for portraiture in a studio environment and able to work within their limitations, then there is absolutely no reason not to use them in a studio for portraits. You do need to appreciate their limitations though (close focus is limited, framing is approximate) and not look at them through rose tinted glasses, easy though this might be. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Bedford Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share #59 Posted January 13, 2016 Well at least some of you realised what my original post was about, so thanks haha. "I'm getting rid of a redundant camera and just using my M. What are you experiences in shooting your portraits with an M instead of a DSLR?" Not, "Do you think I should use my M to shoot portraits and why would I ever do that??" In other news, I did some mucking around in my (lounge room) studio last night since I don't have a subject for another week or so. There's a bare flash filling the room as well. Focused to 1m and shot at f/2.5. Excuse the movie pose selfie! Love the Summarit lenses. Maybe I'll end up with a 75mm eventually if I need a flatter perspective for portraits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 13, 2016 Share #60 Posted January 13, 2016 Carry on Pico.... I do wonder how many think your comments probably say more about you than the girl or the photo though? I'm prettier than the girl in the photo. . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.