What to do?

[jpreisch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am currently shooting with a CL, using 18-56, 55-135, and a 40mm Summaron-c. I have had a Q and a M240 (on the 240 I used the 40mm Summaron-C).  I Probably got rid of them for all the wrong reasons, but that is water under the bridge.  I tend to highly crop my images to end up with my final image.  Because of that I'm thinking of reverting back to full frame, either a late model 240 or an early M10.  Have I lost my mind, or am i plagued with GAS?  Help me decide.  And moderators feel free to move this to the appropriate forum.

Thanks

Jim

[lykaman]

Hi, I've been in that position, it's lovely to have FF but in all honesty although there is a difference between the CL & FF I don't think in everyday life it's really important.. After my accident I sold my X1, Xvario, M-P240 Safari set, a nearly new 28mm Elmarit ASPH, V-Lux4 & lots of other Leica stuff.. All I have now is the D-Lux 7 & Canon 90D with a 28mm and 2 Long Zooms.. I've spent hours deciding on which Leica to get, I hinge between the CL & Q2. In all honesty I don't miss the M - though I'm tempted by the M Monochrome but can't find enough reason tp splash out and commit.. Take your Time, there will always be cameras out there.. Maybe get anew lens for the CL.. Leica lenses are always a good investment.. L

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

IMO this is the time and opportunity to take a long hard look at your photographic technique and retrain your photographer's eye. If you can 'see' the image in a scene that you want to take, then you are using the wrong lens, not the wrong camera. If you cannot see that image, then you have a problem that cannot be solved by buying a larger format or larger resolution camera.

Take this as a challenge to develop your photographer's eye. Spend no more money on cameras or lenses. Decide if you want to be a random happy snapper or a photographer. Delete any shot that doesn't look right SOOC or with minimal cropping (e.g. to straighten). Work out what it is that leads you to crop so heavily. 

It may take a year or so before you notice a difference, but your proportion of uncropped keepers will grow, you will become happier with your output and your wallet will get fatter.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not against cropping: sometimes it's the only way to get an image from where you are standing at that time. And you may need to do it to straighten up. But cropping should be a conscious choice at the time of shooting, not a way of finding an image in an otherwise thoughtless shot.

Edited September 16, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

Try the old painter's tricks.  Stretch out your arm, look across your  upturned thumb to determine the center of interest of your composition, then make a square of your fingers to determine the framing.

What is happening to you is that you are forgetting that your brain will zoom in on the part of the image that interests you and will crop out the uninteresting bits without you noticing.
A camera does -cannot- not do that without the photographer's input. It will see all that it can see. Not more, but certainly not less either.
So: move closer in, pay attention to your framing and composition IN THE VIEWFINDER and only press the shutter button when you have surveyed the whole scene. (*)

There is a place and time for cropping.
Sometimes you cannot get close enough and your lens is too short. But you must be able to see that at the time of shooting, and try and minimize the need by incorporating additional interesting components in your composition.

Or you want to tweak the composition when you see it on the large screen; we all do. But those should be small corrections.

(*) M users will have a tendency to frame loosely because of the technical limitations of the framelines. Get rid of that. EVF=WYSIWYG.

[rob_w]

I miss my M quite a lot.  But not for framing as such.  I always expect to trim the framing a bit in post processing.  It is more like what Jaap describes - through the viewfinder and with manual focusing I can direct attention to areas of the scene which have attracted me.  I 'think' better about what I am doing.

Now I know that I can do all that with my CL as well.  Except, something about the timing of the device and my interaction with it makes the whole process less fluid.  I hate that there is a tiny timing difference between what is happening and what I see in the viewfinder.  And I don't like the further tiny delay with autofocus or the need to guess where the camera will choose focus.  And I hate that the dials are unlabelled, so there is a tiny moment when I have to remember again which dial does which operation and what its current setting is.

I switched to the CL because my eyesight had deteriorated.  Last month I had the eye operations for lens replacement and my eyesight is really good again.  So now I am thinking of going back to the M once more.

Edited September 16, 2020 by rob_w

[wda]

You already have the kit to support your aims. What is missing is a focused mind and that is the area where you can explore new possibilities at minimal cost.  Forget about equipment. Go out and about as circumstances permit and allow your eyes to focus on potential subjects. Ask yourself why do those subjects appeal to you and how can you best portray them with the equipment you already possess. Experiment with alternative solutions. Change your viewpoint and zoom settings in anticipation of your compulsive feelings to crop in post processing. Sort your framing desires at the time of taking your pictures and not rely on salvaging the scene in your light room. Consider this exercise as a no-cost alternative to the constant quest for different hardware solutions.

[ianforber]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I too have a tendency to crop significantly. I think it’s probably because I grew up learning photography with a fixed lens rangefinder, and even when I upgraded to a SLR, it was more than a decade before I could afford anything other than the 50mm it originally came with. Today, I can’t ever remember changing a lens in the field; what’s on the camera when I walk out stays on all day. I know some people see cropping as poor practice, but I just don’t see it that way.

That’s a large part of why I decided to get a Q2 rather than a CL. I have no doubt that either could exceed my capabilities but the Q2 better suits my method as it allows me to crop heavily and still have big enough files to do whatever I want. 

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I hardly ever crop, I look at how the image should be constructed, then use the lens I want to give me the image I want, I used a CL an M8 and an M3. What ever camera I am using I try to make a composition in the viewfinder.  Nice thing with the CL is the images are WISIWIG as Jaap said.

I think the CL should help you, tightening up your image will improve the images. Given a full frame rangefinder your images will be that much looser, you also have less choice of lenses to tighten the photos. Concentrate on what you want out of an image. I use different lenses to help me keep my images where I want them, you have zooms. Use them for what they are. If you are not getting all you need from your zooms, then perhaps you need a longer lens. Get into the photograph don't sit back and observe. 

[Le Chef]

I usually walk around, not lifting up the camera to my eye, until after I’ve seen something that interests me. I try to frame it in my mind’s eye (sometimes harder than you think) and then put the camera up to my eye. If I don’t have the “right” lens with me, this is when I think about how it might be cropped later in LR.

[lct]

Changing format will hardly help you to crop more.You just need more resolution for that but both M10 and M240 have the same pixel count as your CL (24MP). Now i'm not good at composing with cropping in mind so i doubt my advice will be of any help to you. Happy crops err... snaps 

 

[geoffreyg]

At the risk of talking out of both sides of the issue, maybe there are two different modes of shooting? I have enjoyed the M camera, and other larger gear, largely with a single lens (35mm on the M, 60mm on medium format) for much of my shooting. And the arraingment works fine... except there are times (say when documenting or street shooting) when a closer in view would work - not enough to change lenses, but crop instead. 

Then, with the CL and the 18-56 zoom, EVF (and live histogram), there is a lot more information available, and the need for cropping goes away - compose with the zoom. Runs totally different from the M experience. The ability to crop before shooting alleviates any MP distinction of the APS sensor - as you don't lose territory in post. The only disadvantage is the Cl sensor isn't quite as generous as the M240, or so it seems - but is very much recoverable in post. I'm surprised all the time by it. 

Two different ways of shooting, two different cameras. 

[jpreisch]

Thanks to everyone for responding to my initial post.  I was asking a purely technical question ie. would I get better final image quality considering my photographic technique, with full frame rather than APS-C.  The majority of responses suggested my photographic process needs to change, not my equipment choice.  Would everyone who responded in that vein recommend shooting raw and not doing any post processing, thus etraining their eye to seek out better light and subjects? Or would they continue to use post processing to "get the most out of their image"?

I am not trying to start a flame war, with anyone who answered my initial post.  So again thank you for responding.  However my question remains.  In order to continue photographing the way I do, can I get better results by switching to full frame, or do I need to get a higher resolution sensor, like the M 10R?

Thanks again to everyone and please don't take my response in a negative vein.

Jim

[Jeff S]

Lighting, content, framing and processing (apart from cropping) are ALL important. Even when I don’t crop, I always fine tune my print worthy photos. The best tools are between the ears.   Gear should support one’s vision and choices; it can’t create them. And most quality gear these days is more than sufficient for meeting IQ needs; differences lie more in ergonomics, handling, controls, viewing/focusing  systems, etc. Viewers don’t know or care about gear used when looking at a good pic/print.

Jeff

[geoffreyg]

1 hour ago, jpreisch said:

Thanks to everyone for responding to my initial post.  I was asking a purely technical question ie. would I get better final image quality considering my photographic technique, with full frame rather than APS-C.  The majority of responses suggested my photographic process needs to change, not my equipment choice.  Would everyone who responded in that vein recommend shooting raw and not doing any post processing, thus etraining their eye to seek out better light and subjects? Or would they continue to use post processing to "get the most out of their image"?

I am not trying to start a flame war, with anyone who answered my initial post.  So again thank you for responding.  However my question remains.  In order to continue photographing the way I do, can I get better results by switching to full frame, or do I need to get a higher resolution sensor, like the M 10R?

Thanks again to everyone and please don't take my response in a negative vein.

Jim

Part of the difficulty in answering your question is that the proposition isn't quite clear yet: its more likely that cropping is an issue shooting with an M and a fixed lens: one would crop in post because of not changing lenses. That makes sense. In contrast to this, a joy of the CL with its zooms is WYSIWYG, and the ability to crop with the zoom prior to the shot. That has been revelatory and I enjoy the CL for just that. While a bit of magic is lost if cropped in post, it still has the lovely Leica  tones, overall, its a winner. If the issue is cropping, this would seem to favor the CL and the lenses you have. 

Perhaps what you are saying is that after cropping, you have too little real estate and need more MP? That would suggest full frame sensors of highest resolution for more real estate (pixels), but this raises the issue of shooting with a single (and possibly not the one you want) lens and cropping in post. Doesn't seem like the best pathway. 

So for the problem you have raised (if you have assessed it correctly), I'd recommend staying with the CL and the lenses you have, maybe adding a prime to see what that does. This is in line with the above comments on process. 

Apart from this concern, there are other reasons to consider an M or full frame camera - I prefer the manual operations of the Q and M, but am able to work without them. I wouldn't switch (or add) for that reason only. Also prefer the viewfinder of the M, but like all the info in the CL. In fact rather than the M240 (now sitting in the closet), the M10M appeals - simply because it is so good at what it does, and nothing else does that. So rather than wanting a more general "M" solution, my take is the CL for general use, and only a different camera for specialized purposes (assuming the bank account will support that). 

Hope this helps. 

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by geoffreyg

[ramarren]

On 9/15/2020 at 7:01 PM, jpreisch said:

I am currently shooting with a CL, using 18-56, 55-135, and a 40mm Summaron-c. I have had a Q and a M240 (on the 240 I used the 40mm Summaron-C).  I Probably got rid of them for all the wrong reasons, but that is water under the bridge.  I tend to highly crop my images to end up with my final image.  Because of that I'm thinking of reverting back to full frame, either a late model 240 or an early M10.  Have I lost my mind, or am i plagued with GAS?  Help me decide.  And moderators feel free to move this to the appropriate forum.

Thanks

Jim

Just what is it that you think moving from the CL to an M will net you? The Ms you're looking at have the same number of pixels, and if you're using good lenses on any of them and keeping the ISO setting in the range up to 3200, you'll be hard pressed to see any difference in the image they make at all. 

G

[jaapv]

On 9/22/2020 at 1:41 PM, jpreisch said:

Thanks to everyone for responding to my initial post.  I was asking a purely technical question ie. would I get better final image quality considering my photographic technique, with full frame rather than APS-C.  The majority of responses suggested my photographic process needs to change, not my equipment choice.  Would everyone who responded in that vein recommend shooting raw and not doing any post processing, thus etraining their eye to seek out better light and subjects? Or would they continue to use post processing to "get the most out of their image"?

I am not trying to start a flame war, with anyone who answered my initial post.  So again thank you for responding.  However my question remains.  In order to continue photographing the way I do, can I get better results by switching to full frame, or do I need to get a higher resolution sensor, like the M 10R?

Thanks again to everyone and please don't take my response in a negative vein.

Jim

Not processing is throwing away half the image.That is nothing new and has nothing to do with film or digital, pure photography or manipulating, compensating for bad technique,  or whatever excuse is trotted out.

Have a look at how HCB, certainly not the least of photographers, and other famous photographers of the past, had their photographs post-processed:

https://petapixel.com/2013/09/12/marked-photographs-show-iconic-prints-edited-darkroom/

You can improve your photography by honing your vision, your sense of composition and timing and your technique, both in-camera and in postprocessing (and yes, Jeff, printing too ). The gear you use, as long as it is good enough to support your skill, is completely irrelevant. Any Leica camera (and a lot of other ones as well, for that matter) will meet that standard, for all of us.

You want to  do better? Spend your money on a few workshops with photographers you can respect, instead of on gear.