Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 4, 2007 Share #81 Posted October 4, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Funny out of all the DSLR finders the best one was the R9/DMR combo. not surprised coming from manual focus heritage Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 4, 2007 Posted October 4, 2007 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here Reflections on M? and Full Frame Sensors )including new lenses). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
charlesphoto99 Posted October 4, 2007 Share #82 Posted October 4, 2007 The M8 is not worse than film, but rather a lot better, so that really isn't a fair comment. Having said that, I would love a usable ISO 100-3200, with 6400 as an option like the current 3200. It's not worse than film but it's also not better than film (at any iso). It's *different* from film. Digital will always be another medium not a replacement in my book. Both have their uses - I prefer both for different places and situations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted October 4, 2007 Share #83 Posted October 4, 2007 Sean - Thank you, and yes I read "Street Photography" article with interest. The photographers you mention are all accomplished and influential, and not coincidentally could be described as 'street photographers'. But there are many ways to photograph and I when I think of the photographers who have grabbed my attention, they mostly could be described [and this is crude I know] as 'formal' photographers , rather than 'street photographers'. I understand the distinctions you make between seeing subjects through a direct viewfinder rather than on an slr screen. My complaint is not against direct viewfinders, but with anything within the viewfinder which distracts me from the complicated enough process of trying to make good work. With the M8 [as with other rangefinders] the space outside the framelines always distracts me as do twinned framelines, both factors add uncertainty to my image making, and for me they are unwelcome. But I chose to stay with rangefinder photography, and the M8 is what it is and I always knew I would have to work with it's weaknesses in order to gain from it's strengths. Your writing has been invaluable for me, I hope you will review the new Summarits. Best wishes to you. .................... Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 5, 2007 Share #84 Posted October 5, 2007 It's not worse than film but it's also not better than film (at any iso). It's *different* from film. Digital will always be another medium not a replacement in my book. Both have their uses - I prefer both for different places and situations. My comment was made with respect to noise and sharpness. Digital doesn't replace film (for me or you), and I also still shoot an M6. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 5, 2007 Share #85 Posted October 5, 2007 Funny out of all the DSLR finders the best one was the R9/DMR combo. not surprised coming from manual focus heritage The frame lines are what I like best about that combination. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 5, 2007 Share #86 Posted October 5, 2007 Sean - Thank you, and yes I read "Street Photography" article with interest. The photographers you mention are all accomplished and influential, and not coincidentally could be described as 'street photographers'. But there are many ways to photograph and I when I think of the photographers who have grabbed my attention, they mostly could be described [and this is crude I know] as 'formal' photographers , rather than 'street photographers'. I understand the distinctions you make between seeing subjects through a direct viewfinder rather than on an slr screen. My complaint is not against direct viewfinders, but with anything within the viewfinder which distracts me from the complicated enough process of trying to make good work. With the M8 [as with other rangefinders] the space outside the framelines always distracts me as do twinned framelines, both factors add uncertainty to my image making, and for me they are unwelcome. But I chose to stay with rangefinder photography, and the M8 is what it is and I always knew I would have to work with it's weaknesses in order to gain from it's strengths. Your writing has been invaluable for me, I hope you will review the new Summarits. Best wishes to you. .................... Chris Hi Chris, Thanks and I hope to have the Summarit test samples very soon. So your last comments bring us more into the heart of the matter...different photographers have different preferences for how they see the subject. For me, the space outside the frame lines is very important, for you it is more of distraction. Some like to see their subjects in shallow DOF (as on an SLR groundglass) while others prefer the infinite DOF of a glass window. I'm certainly in favor of photographers having options. The traditional rangefinder view is not only an old design but also, for many of us, a very good one. SLR photographers have many digital options to choose from, many of them quite good. RF photographers, such as myself, however, have only the M8 and (when it can be found) the Epson. If any company should be keeping the rangefinder viewing tradition alive, it should be Leica. I suppose the grey area is that some like the size and weight of the M cameras and lenses but have no interest in the traditional RF viewing system. Even if there were to be an M9 with electronic frame lines, it would still (thankfully) show the area outside the frame lines. So, it may be that what you, and perhaps some others, would really like is a very compact SLR system. This is what Olympus tried to do with the OM cameras ("O" for Olympus and "M" as a nod to the Leica M series). The 4/3 system was meant to continue that tradition of compactness but it hasn't yet, quite worked out that way. So, one niche that may remain open (for Leica or someone else to fill) would be for a DSLR the size of an OM-1 with matching prime lenses that are the sizes of the older (and quite excellent) OM lenses. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted October 5, 2007 Share #87 Posted October 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) With the M8 [as with other rangefinders] the space outside the framelines always distracts me as do twinned framelines, both factors add uncertainty to my image making, and for me they are unwelcome. But I chose to stay with rangefinder photography, and the M8 is what it is and I always knew I would have to work with it's weaknesses in order to gain from it's strengths. Different strokes. The strength of Rangefinder viewing for those that prefer it are being able to see outside the frame and having a 'transparent' window that doesn't impose the false view of the shallow DOF of looking through a wide open lens. Pentax and Olympus are moving towards more compact DSLR's and we are bound to have M sized DSLR's eventually - maybe using 4/3 or APS-C sensors. We'll also see more advanced electronic viewing systems. But the M being a rangefinder and whose market is photographers who prefer RF viewing will likely always have an optical finder showing more then the frame even if the frames are projected electronically. As those are viewed as it's main strengths and what makes the system desirable. That is not an issue of old versus new just different preferences in viewing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 5, 2007 Share #88 Posted October 5, 2007 seing through DSLR is like that 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/34888-reflections-on-m-and-full-frame-sensors-including-new-lenses/?do=findComment&comment=370154'>More sharing options...
punktum Posted October 5, 2007 Share #89 Posted October 5, 2007 M9 at photokina 2010 with full frame >12mp and higher and better ISO performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 5, 2007 Share #90 Posted October 5, 2007 WORD, I mean every word of Sean Leica VF is excellent and I see no points to modify that when it is about longevity, durability, while taking some beatings It's about street photography, not sitting on the tripod in a studio. Regarding size, to hold a d70 is like driving a huge monster truck. Om-1 is amazingly small to be a SLR. It'd take very long time until electronics stuffs are shrinked enough to fit in the same om1 body Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 5, 2007 Share #91 Posted October 5, 2007 It'd take very long time until electronics stuffs are shrinked enough to fit in the same om1 body Maybe not.? A DSLR with a body the size of the OM-1, with an manual shutter dial, etc. (with small lenses to match) might appeal to a lot of people. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 5, 2007 Share #92 Posted October 5, 2007 WORD, I mean every word of Sean Leica VF is excellent and I see no points to modify that when it is about longevity, durability, while taking some beatings It's about street photography, not sitting on the tripod in a studio. Regarding size, to hold a d70 is like driving a huge monster truck. Om-1 is amazingly small to be a SLR. It'd take very long time until electronics stuffs are shrinked enough to fit in the same om1 body Well my street happens to be any place were i get paid to shoot and it ain't on the street. So canon is sports only, Nikon People only, leica is street. Is this how we buy camera's now, don't think so. leica is whatever you make it to be just like any other camera it is a tool and maybe certain ones perform a duty better than others but I am sick of hearing this pigeon hole talk about sticking a leica camera in a box and scolding it for thinking it is anything but a street camera . sorry total BS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted October 5, 2007 Share #93 Posted October 5, 2007 guy, you misunderstand me. I'm not stupid enough to claim that leica m bodies are made for only street photography. I could only see that this was designed for that at first hand and you can use this for other stuffs also of course. The different thing is that you can use every camera including some hundred kilos stuffs at studio but not in outdoors. Why anybody should buy every camera for specific purpose when most photographers cannot afford that? I think some people are making some compromises to get optimal use of excellent lenses from Leica, don't we? I'd be not surprised if Leica could be able to make R body with 35mm sensor before M. Congrats to 6666 posts btw, Mancuso Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted October 5, 2007 Share #94 Posted October 5, 2007 Well my street happens to be any place were i get paid to shoot and it ain't on the street. So canon is sports only, Nikon People only, leica is street. Is this how we buy camera's now, don't think so. leica is whatever you make it to be just like any other camera it is a tool and maybe certain ones perform a duty better than others but I am sick of hearing this pigeon hole talk about sticking a leica camera in a box and scolding it for thinking it is anything but a street camera . sorry total BS Well Guy you can use it for anything you like, if it suits you. I have done a lot of product photography with it but I'd be the first to say a rangefinder is not really suited for that task. I used a 1Ds for 'street' photos for 2 years because there was no RF digital but it wasn't the tool I would have designed for the task. Whatever you use it for the Leica was designed to be and made it's bones as a discreet reportage camera. That's it's genetic makeup and should stay it's focus in future development. Now I find an RF reportage camera can also make an ideal camera for shooting fashion or lifestyle stock or even a landscape camera for a shooter who needs to travel very light -wouldn't be the first choice of many, but different strokes. So there are lot's of potential uses of the M if it suits your way of working but Leica needs to keep it's eye on the ball and keep the M true to it's reason for being. I don't really like the term 'street photography' but I'll use it here for the sake of simplicity -the ultimate street photographers camera. seing through DSLR is like that Perfect illustration. Peripheral vision is a vital part of seeing when you are trying to frame a non-static scene. That and the non-interface interface of the M are it's strengths. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted October 5, 2007 Share #95 Posted October 5, 2007 Guy, let me make sure I'm clear on my point. I have been using the M8 for stuff I was formerly using medium format cameras for. I think that's great but I think it would be a mistake for Leica to try and morph the Leica into a 1Ds with a rangefinder because of photographers like you or me. Sure more IQ is always nice but don't place it as a priority in future development above the qualities that make for a simple, compact reportage camera. The IQ is very good and will get better but focus on making it quieter, more reliable, quicker and more responsive and don't let it get any bigger or more expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 5, 2007 Share #96 Posted October 5, 2007 I know guys i just heard this street thing way to often. God bless the past great leica shooters of our era but it can do other things too and there is more than just street photography as a category to use them in. Sorry if i was pissy. testing 3 lenses and did not like what i saw from one of my bodies , it made my 28 cron look like crap and my WATE also . Second body all is very well I just figured out . Back to comparing. BTW the lenses are the WATE at 21mm, 24 elmarit and 28 cron. Everything is great at infinity now viewing the 20 ft test. i hate testing. LOL Sorry guys for butting in there Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted October 5, 2007 Share #97 Posted October 5, 2007 One other thing I'd take in an M, if they could do it without making it much larger: in-camera IS, like with the Pentax K10. JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted October 5, 2007 Share #98 Posted October 5, 2007 I'd be happy with a view about 10% larger than the mounted lens, with only one frame line showing that matches the mounted lens and moves as you focus, both to correct parallax and frame line field accuracy. this would have the same viewfinder image size for a 21 or a 90. And while we are at it, an adjustable dipoter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted October 6, 2007 Share #99 Posted October 6, 2007 ....with only one frame line showing that matches the mounted lens and moves as you focus, both to correct parallax and frame line field accuracy. this would have the same viewfinder image size for a 21 or a 90. And while we are at it, an adjustable dipoter. John - You're a clever guy, you couldn't knock a couple of these out in your spare time could you? That's one for you, and one for me. OK make it six; so Guy can buy four. ................... Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 6, 2007 Share #100 Posted October 6, 2007 John is a very talented guy , you really should see what he does for a living. His industrial designs for are really nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.