Shooting in portrait orientation

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While there may not be a downside to a circular sensor from a photographic standpoint, my guess is that from a manufacturing perspective, it could be significant.

 

IIRC and disregarding the ver orientation problem,  I believe the optimal sensor size if you're trying to crop to any of the standard formats is 6x7, i.e. it provides the best utilization when cropping to the other formats. 2x3 is pretty poor in that regard.

[Advertisement]

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

[kkcsm]

My position for portrait orientation.  I always use thumb/forefinger, I don't use the tab (would prefer that they didn't put them on ;-).  I've never had my hands block anything, they don't move at all from landscape, just rotate 90 degrees.  

 

I shoot frequently at night; I often have to rotate the camera to a strange orientation perpendicular to something to focus on, then frame and shoot.  That would be difficult to do quickly if I had to re-grip the camera.

 

-K

 

 

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!

[jmahto]

....

On a different note  as to cropping 

I was taught in school not to crop, It made you more deliberate. Teaching you to understand your choice of focal length and your commitment to the image...before shooting. We filed out our negative carriers as proof of that commitment 

Forty years later I still think about not cropping  as I shoot and print.......Today its more of a preferred way of working not a rule...yes I do crop...when necessary. Not cropping is a valuable technique when learning the craft. 

One should never shoot with the intention of "figuring" it out later.

 

Working professionally ...you have to crop ...your shooting square and the clients wants an 8X10. Or for perhaps the photo will have many uses and needs different formats.

 Most of the time, I know as I shoot that I'll need to crop a little for different reasons.

 

How do you all look at cropping ?

.....Is ok to change the direction of the thread? 

Snipped the rest only to retain the cropping part.

 

While I agree that there are many circumstances where careful framing is a must, there are other instances when shooting "loose" makes sense. In these cases some decisions can be postponed to PP so that mental energy can be focused on the aspects that are not possible in PP. These are, in particular order, decisive moment, focus point, aperture decision, shutterspeed decision, panning decision.... etc. 

 

Therefore, "thou hall never crop" is not one of my commandments.

[ECohen]

Snipped the rest only to retain the cropping part.

 

While I agree that there are many circumstances where careful framing is a must, there are other instances when shooting "loose" makes sense. In these cases some decisions can be postponed to PP so that mental energy can be focused on the aspects that are not possible in PP. These are, in particular order, decisive moment, focus point, aperture decision, shutterspeed decision, panning decision.... etc. 

 

Therefore, "thou hall never crop" is not one of my commandments.

 

 

I couldn't agree with you more!!!  In the beginning some rules are helpful just teach you how to see .......then they are no longer necessary......after 40years I can barely remember the rules

[jmahto]

I couldn't agree with you more!!!  In the beginning some rules are helpful just teach you how to see .......then they are no longer necessary......after 40years I can barely remember the rules

As Wittgenstein once said something like ... "He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed upon it". No, Wittgenstein  was not a photographer.

[Peter H]

As Wittgenstein once said something like ... "He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed upon it". No, Wittgenstein  was not a photographer.

 

 

Nor a house painter.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With a round sensor the bad chance of painting oneself into a corner would be diminushed and more photos could be "saved" with a bigger choice of an adequate format in pp.

[pop]

I find it somewhat difficult to visualize an inscribed rectangle into a circle. I think that a camera which makes circular images ought to include variable inscribed rectangles in the VF and display, perhaps similar to the guide lines the  M includes now for different aspect ratios.

[honcho]

Round matts are always equally jarring to my eye as seeing someone holding a Leica M in portrait orientation with their arm above their head. 

 

Maybe such things are intended to be noticed.  

[jaapv]

Anyway, a round sensor would be prohibitively expensive.

Normally sensors are cut from the wafer in straight lines with minimal loss (except along the edge, as the wafer is round). The bigger the sensor, the more wafer one needs,the more it will cost. Cutting round sensors would waste about half the surface, making a round sensor for the 135 format at least as costly to produce as a hefty medium format one. Not to mention the adaptation of cutting technology required, the new readout technology needed, etc.

[pop]

Anyway, a round sensor would be prohibitively expensive.

Normally sensors are cut from the wafer in straight lines with minimal loss (except along the edge, as the wafer is round). The bigger the sensor, the more wafer one needs,the more it will cost. Cutting round sensors would waste about half the surface, making a round sensor for the 135 format at least as costly to produce as a hefty medium format one. Not to mention the adaptation of cutting technology required, the new readout technology needed, etc.

True. But: the sensor doesn't have to be round. A square one would do exactly the same thing. Given that the industry has a fine record of repurposing blemished wavers, the perfect ones could be used for square-format MF cameras, those with blemishes in corners for the circular ones. Should raise the yield by roughly 25%, I think, which is not to be sneered at.

[pop]

What we do not know, however, is whether all Leica lenses make round images. The optical systems (the glass bits) will certainly do so, but the final assemblies may have baffles (or what are they called) to limit the image to the gate format in order to reduce any stray light within  the body. The lens hoods may not be appropriate, either.

[ECohen]

What we do not know, however, is whether all Leica lenses make round images. The optical systems (the glass bits) will certainly do so, but the final assemblies may have baffles (or what are they called) to limit the image to the gate format in order to reduce any stray light within  the body. The lens hoods may not be appropriate, either.

 

 

Not to be a Debbie Downer...I think what we do know it that Leica is not going to make a camera with a round sensor

 

But if they did ...I wonder what they would call it?

[Peter Kilmister]

It might be called a 'toowit', if they get a round toowit.

[Paul J]

They would call it Leica P. P being for Preposterous.

 

All a round sensor would be good for is rotating canvas post shoot. People can make pictures round now but no one with a right mind does it. A round sensor will come around the time Levis make mini skirts for men.

 

There is one thing more usable and sensible than a round sensor that no one here wants to discuss  - more Megapixels! 

[Exodies]

A round sensor provides the maximum sized rectangle of whatever proportions you desire from a particular lens series.

Lens hoods would need to become circular and therefore not as dainty as some. I haven't seen an M lens which didn't have a circular view.

Hexagonal sensor chips (with a circular image array) would tile the circular wafers with less waste than rectangular ones.

Triangular sensels may make better pictures than a Bayer filter mosaic.

 

It would be a miracle if the box wasn't bigger on the outside.

 

Paul J, the aim isn't to make circular pictures (I try that, it takes some getting used to) but to discard a constraint imposed by the manufacturing needs of film.

[Guest]

What we do not know, however, is whether all Leica lenses make round images. The optical systems (the glass bits) will certainly do so, but the final assemblies may have baffles (or what are they called) to limit the image to the gate format in order to reduce any stray light within  the body. The lens hoods may not be appropriate, either.

T lenses make round images on the SL.

 

Soon pixelpeepers will know this too about all Leica lenses, when there will be mirrorless medium format cameras. Though the microprisms in the corners of sensors of the digi-Ms will be absent.

 

And with a concave (?recessed? versenkt) lens board with an M bayonett and time exposures in low light (because there would be not enough room for a shutter in a large format camera) I think it could be visible, that Leica lenses produce evenly round images.

[chris_tribble]

Snipped the rest only to retain the cropping part.

 

While I agree that there are many circumstances where careful framing is a must, there are other instances when shooting "loose" makes sense. In these cases some decisions can be postponed to PP so that mental energy can be focused on the aspects that are not possible in PP. These are, in particular order, decisive moment, focus point, aperture decision, shutterspeed decision, panning decision.... etc. 

 

Therefore, "thou hall never crop" is not one of my commandments.

Again - full agreement - check the work of Penti Sammallahati (http://thephotographersgallery.org.uk/penttisammallahti) one of my all time favourites.  You crop when it will make the image better... Seems pretty obvious to me - though I also find that I don't often crop (old habits from slide film die hard....)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M