Waist level

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/3/2020 at 6:52 AM, andybarton said:

A tilt screen would add bulk to the camera body, something that is not desirable.

The 5mm (0.2 in.) thicker body of the M240 platform certainly caused sufficient hue and cry to indicate that adhering to the original M camera footprint is what M camera users want. 

At first, I thought the complaints were silly.  Now I have to agree with that view, having owned and used an M-P 240 for five years.  It looks and feels somewhat ungainly compared to my M4-P; it just doesn't feel or handle quite right.

If we take the M camera and add this, add that and add another feature without thought of increasing its size, it ceases to be an M camera. 

JMHO but I'd rather have an M11, not an M6x7...

Edited July 5, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[roelv1]

1 hour ago, johnwolf said:

Ethical considerations aside, it seem clear that there is no legal issue with TAKING candids of strangers in public places, even in the EU. What matters is what you do with those photos, and, in particular, whether any ban applies to personal web sites and social media, which are the ways most photographers publish today. In the USA such uses are protected as artistic expression, but the regulation in the EU still isn't clear to me. 

Apologies to the OP is this seems to have derailed your topic. But it really hasn't in my mind. Personally, I feel flip screens are one of the best inventions street photographers could have hoped for. Why not offer M models with and without, as is done with the LCD?

John

Here in the EU it is the same. Now a last word about the ethics. I give an example. A very rich man steps out of a Rolls Royce a couple of steps away from a tramp lying on the sidewalk.The driver looks in a disapproving way to the tramp. A photographer sees it, pretends with his flip screen of his new Leica M that he is just looking on his camera, and shoots the scene. The photo is published in a magazine, and later in a book. The Rolls Royce driver, who didn't notice he was captured, gets very angry, understanding the meaning of the picture in which he doesn't want to participate, and goes to court. He will lose his case, whatever he will argue. I can give lots of other examples. And I also know that some photographers, including myself,  struggle sometimes in a moral way with the question: to publish or not to publish. But there is also something like the common interest. Thousands and thousands of pictures have been made through the history of photography , that told and tell us something about social circumstances, interactions, etcetera, etcetera. And a lot of those pictures were made either inconspicuous or without asking for permission. ( Robert Frank who mostly walked directly away after taking the shot).  Partly because of this meaning that the metier can have, there is this freedom of speech, of expression and of news gathering. Therefore it is free to take pictures in public places, and its free to publish them in books. The exception ( proven harmful consequences or commercial purposes) has already been discussed. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Einst_Stein]

Leica has a very cute waist level optical finder attachment for M. You can also use the EVF for waist level. It;'s much better than the flip or tilt LCD.

Check B&H. 

[tom.w.bn]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb roelv1:

No, it does not. This data directive is not aimed for what we discuss, like Farnz explained. Philip also was right. The lawyers in the two  lawsuit cases that I mentioned didn't even refer to the data directive. Once again: It is always permitted to take pictures of people in the public space. Problems can only occur when pictures are published. But than the subject has to prove that his or hers reasonable interest is harmed. A judge will than consider the interest of free news gathering, freedom of speech and expression, against that reasonable interest. The complainant must have had real harmful consequences. Only the fact that he is photographed without knowing will give him no case. 

Ehm... No.   Not the victim of an illegal publication has to prove something. The publisher/photographer has to prove that it was lawful to publish that photo. The problem is not taking a photo. The problem is in many cases the publication.

[roelv1]

28 minutes ago, tom.w.bn said:

Ehm... No.   Not the victim of an illegal publication has to prove something. The publisher/photographer has to prove that it was lawful to publish that photo. The problem is not taking a photo. The problem is in many cases the publication.

One more time, and now finally: publishing photo's in a book is legal. If there is a harmful consequence for someone in that book who was pictured, he can try to prevent publication or let it disappear from the bookshops. Than he has to go to court and prove he is suffering from harmful damage. I myself published six books, was sued three times in all those years, so I know what I'm talking about. In all the three cases the complainant lost. Also in appeal that one person tried. The publisher and myself had to prove nothing. 

[tom.w.bn]

vor 39 Minuten schrieb roelv1:

One more time, and now finally: publishing photo's in a book is legal.

This is an international forum. I made the mistake myself to state something as a general rule that probably only applies to my country. Your general statement probably only applies to your country. Media/publishing/Internet law is very complex and different for every country.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, verwackelt said:

I do not believe that Leica will ever put a tilt Display on a M. The M is a sacred cow that is not allowed to be touched.
I once hoped Leica is open minded and they put a tilt display at least on the SL2 or a tiltable EVF like Fuji GFX has.
It would be very useful for low position shots in general. Not only street!
Or over headshots in a crowd etc.
But Leica is stubborn  and wants to fulfill the wishes of most Leicaowners that better like to have a designobject than a perfect tool.
 

I see a different company approach.  Most here scoffed at an M without a screen, while others wished for same. Most here likewise scoffed at the concept of a monochrome M sensor (many who are now loyal Monochrom owners). Many here oppose the movement to a high MP M sensor, yet Leica proceeds.  Leica execs have told us that they’ve experimented with hybrid viewing options, but have yet to find an uncompromising  solution. Leica Rumors reported on a patent for an optoelectronic rangefinder. Some wanted video capability with their M, and the M240 was born (eliminated in the M10 largely due to heat issues with the slimmer body). The S system bucks the mirror-less trend, while both it and the original SL borrowed from Phase One’s four unlabeled button interface, recognizing another company’s design concept, while at the same time showcasing a state of the art EVF for the SL that still remains competitive many years later.  Just because your pet feature (or someone else’s) isn’t currently in an M doesn’t mean the company is shy about change. But I appreciate that the Company’s willingness to hold fast on some design elements has resulted, for instance, in the remarkable ability to use 50+ year old M lenses on all digital M bodies, and now L mount bodies.

Jeff

[roelv1]

59 minutes ago, tom.w.bn said:

This is an international forum. I made the mistake myself to state something as a general rule that probably only applies to my country. Your general statement probably only applies to your country. Media/publishing/Internet law is very complex and different for every country.

I'll give you that. Indeed the best thing to do is  finding out what the law on this point is in a given country. Germany is very restrictive. Most countries are less. 

[johnwolf]

2 hours ago, roelv1 said:

One more time, and now finally: publishing photo's in a book is legal. If there is a harmful consequence for someone in that book who was pictured, he can try to prevent publication or let it disappear from the bookshops. Than he has to go to court and prove he is suffering from harmful damage. I myself published six books, was sued three times in all those years, so I know what I'm talking about. In all the three cases the complainant lost. Also in appeal that one person tried. The publisher and myself had to prove nothing. 

Thanks for sharing your experience. I'd say having to endure the cost and hassle of multiple lawsuits and appeals, even if vindicated, is reason enough to reconsider street photography. If I lived in the EU, I'd find another genre, however on the right side of the law I was.

John

Edited July 5, 2020 by johnwolf

[Robert Blanko]

vor 29 Minuten schrieb roelv1:

I'll give you that. Indeed the best thing to do is  finding out what the law on this point is in a given country. Germany is very restrictive. Most countries are less. 

Indeed, in Germany another law protecting people who were photographed without permission is the so-called Kunsturhebergesetz.
 

By the way, the data protection directive was applicable not before May 25, 2018, so that any acts committed before might not be covered by said directive.

 

[farnz]

24 minutes ago, johnwolf said:

Thanks for sharing your experience. I'd say having to endure the cost and hassle of multiple lawsuits and appeals, even if vindicated, is reason enough to reconsider street photography. If I lived in the EU, I'd find another genre, however on the right side of the law I was.

John

You might think differently if your livelihood depended on it, as I assume roelv1's does.

Pete.

[johnwolf]

45 minutes ago, farnz said:

You might think differently if your livelihood depended on it, as I assume roelv1's does.

Pete.

Yes, of course. I'm speaking as a hobbyist and can imagine the challenges privacy laws cause for those making a living photographing people. 

John 

Edited July 5, 2020 by johnwolf

[verwackelt]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Jeff S:

I see a different company approach.  Most here scoffed at an M without a screen, while others wished for same. Most here likewise scoffed at the concept of a monochrome M sensor (many who are now loyal Monochrom owners). Many here oppose the movement to a high MP M sensor, yet Leica proceeds.  Leica execs have told us that they’ve experimented with hybrid viewing options, but have yet to find an uncompromising  solution. Leica Rumors reported on a patent for an optoelectronic rangefinder. Some wanted video capability with their M, and the M240 was born (eliminated in the M10 largely due to heat issues with the slimmer body). The S system bucks the mirror-less trend, while both it and the original SL borrowed from Phase One’s four unlabeled button interface, recognizing another company’s design concept, while at the same time showcasing a state of the art EVF for the SL that still remains competitive many years later.  Just because your pet feature (or someone else’s) isn’t currently in an M doesn’t mean the company is shy about change. But I appreciate that the Company’s willingness to hold fast on some design elements has resulted, for instance, in the remarkable ability to use 50+ year old M lenses on all digital M bodies, and now L mount bodies.

Jeff

You are right. Leica does change something but more slow than other companies.
And the M is their traditionel product where changes have to be done carefully to keep the character of it.
I hoped that they would be more brave and would use the SL range to try more modern things. A tilt display is an quite proven feature today.
May be a SL3 will have it or a marvelous tilt EVF like the GFX…

[Jeff S]

14 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

You are right. Leica does change something but more slow than other companies.
 

I don’t see other companies with screen—less digital cameras or monochrome based cameras (Phase backs excluded).  [Dr. Kaufmann has said that more Monochrom products might appear at some point, now that the M has led the way.]  Leica jumped the competition by years with the SL’s EVF performance.  The S system was also ahead of its time (and with a stunning OVF), until lower priced mirror-less options appeared. Leica doesn’t get enough credit IMO for innovation. But, yes, they also care about heritage and certain core principles.

Jeff

[Fontan]

Having loved and shot with Hasselblad 503 for quite some time now I would say that I would enjoy having a tilt screen on my M10. The fact that EVF is on a rangefinder to me means a cat is out of the bag. You might as well have a tilt screen. I do think however that one can easily learn how to shoot from the hip effectively, even with rangefinder or manual focusing without having an EVF / tilt screen as well though. You don’t have to use it if you don’t want to, or buy a model without it, kind of in the spirit of M10D. 

[Simone_DF]

On 7/5/2020 at 11:58 AM, Glasauge said:

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!

I guess these have been shot without a tilt screen  ...

stay safe

Hans

You can also handwash your clothes in the nearest river, but technology has evolved and I'm positive most of us use a washing machine nowadays, because it's more convenient and efficient. 

You can indeed shot without a tilt screen, but a tilt screen is a big technology advance that makes it much, much easier and solves a lot of problems. 

[Jeff S]

My guess is that Leica considered a tilt screen just as they’ve weighed the pros and cons of many design options (Dr. Kaufmann admitted that he initially thought a screen less M was crazy... in an interview with Hugh Brownstone). Potential negatives might have been body slimness (a huge M10 priority), weather sealing compromise (improved with M10), robustness and potential repair issues, or sheer design elegance and simplicity. Doesn’t mean that the feature couldn’t appear in a future model as design considerations and tech evolve... crazier things have happened.

Jeff

[DaveNC]

Currently I shoot only with my M (and iPhone!)

I used to enjoy my Nikon F3 with the waist level finder.  It wasn't too bulky at all.  I'd also shoot with a digital capture and contemporary metering F3 if it existed.

[sambo]

On 7/3/2020 at 11:23 AM, rramesh said:

The Leica M is a rangefinder and great for street photography as one can see through rangefinder with one eye and use the other to observe the scene. This is how a rangefinder should be used. Range focusing makes for a 'quick compose and click' as it obviates the need to take time for accurate rangefinder focusing.

For waist level work I am sure one can always kneel and take a pretty decent picture. The Visoflex is a great aid for the M10 and it does allow for 90 degree focusing.

The whole idea of street photography is to be discrete, kneeling to get a low viewpoint  is the opposite.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[D.Elk-C]

Yes,Yes,Yes.I would have thought that Leica could have learnt this from Panasonic, I have been using an old LUMIX FZ50 for years but the screen has been so useful. I run a R9 and a R6 and all those with R glass and use film, wonder,  with all this modern technology Leica could very well go back to film.At least there would be negs to go back to. What about it Leica design chaps!!