fotografr Posted October 18, 2007 Share #21 Posted October 18, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Science universally acknowledges that mathematical theory is a more accurate and reliable basis for conclusion than anecdotal evidence. However the most accurate and reliable is valid experimental data. I have not read where the Thumbs-Up inventor tested the device to determine the minimum amount of force necessary to cause damage to the camera, which I would think would be a reasonable step in R&D. 1) Science doesn't UNIVERSALLY acknowledge ANYTHING. Neither do scientists. 2) I read in one exchange on the Rangefinder Forum, that Tim did, in fact, test the Thumbs-Up with considerable force on his own M8 and was unable to cause any damage. It would be unreasonable to expect him to exert such force as to actually break either the hot shoe or the Thumbs-Up, just to get an exact torque figure for potential buyers. 3) If the device had a more agreeable type face, I'd have one on my camera in a flash. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2007 Posted October 18, 2007 Hi fotografr, Take a look here Thumbs Up. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
HetDraakje Posted October 18, 2007 Share #22 Posted October 18, 2007 Doesn't the use of a flash have a similar "lever-function" on the hot shoe when bent? It might be true that the shoe will break sooner compared to this metal device Boen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 18, 2007 Share #23 Posted October 18, 2007 Doesn't the use of a flash have a similar "lever-function" on the hot shoe when bent? It might be true that the shoe will break sooner compared to this metal device Boen Absolutely. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haribo Posted October 18, 2007 Share #24 Posted October 18, 2007 I use it. I love it. It's that simply. Regarding the ugly font, got rid of it with some Super DeGooper. It's just silkscreened onto it. easy peasy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tummydoc Posted October 18, 2007 Share #25 Posted October 18, 2007 Doesn't the use of a flash have a similar "lever-function" on the hot shoe when bent? It might be true that the shoe will break sooner compared to this metal device Boen Every shoe-mount electronic flash made in the last perhaps 30 years, unless it has been modified, has a plastic foot which will break with less force than would break or bend most hot-shoes or top-plates. However the potential for leverage of the top plate (and subsequent effect on the rangefinder alignment) of Leica M cameras by a flash is an often cited--and agreed as legitimate--concern amongst Leica M users. The tiny cadre of individuals obviously smitten with the Thumbs-Up chooses to omit that fact from their propaganda, which is their prerogative. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted October 18, 2007 Share #26 Posted October 18, 2007 Glad I'm not the only one to put form ahead of function on this! Although I guess you could paint it out if you wanted. All a bit of a moot point for me anyway, since I've got the Leica grip and don't really feel the need for more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tummydoc Posted October 18, 2007 Share #27 Posted October 18, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1) Science doesn't UNIVERSALLY acknowledge ANYTHING. Neither do scientists. Patently untrue, unless one speaks of mad scientists, alchemists and others outside the realm of legitimate science. Laws of physics, mathematics and chemistry are universally accepted, to name a few. What scientists often disagree on is the interpretation of data, not the fact that anecdotal evidence is unreliable as a foundation for scientific conclusion. It would be unreasonable to expect him to exert such force as to actually break either the hot shoe or the Thumbs-Up, just to get an exact torque figure for potential buyers. It would be entirely reasonable, just as it's reasonable to expect auto manufacturers to destroy their cars to determine their crashworthiness. Subjecting a product to more abuse than a user is likely to, is an accepted practise across the gamut of industries, and a major marketing tool. Timex watch dropped from a helicopter into the Grand Canyon, Samsonite luggage given to a cageful of gorillas, Bic pen shot from a rifle into a 2x4...the list goes on and on. If the device had a more agreeable type face, I'd have one on my camera in a flash. Oh, well, of course that's so much more of a pressing concern than whether or not it could pry the top-plate up like a soda-can lid Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
etrigan63 Posted October 18, 2007 Share #28 Posted October 18, 2007 That's great! Whatever it takes to improve the handling of the M8 is a welcome addition. Has anyone used this in combination of the grip? Is that too much of a good thing or does it work just as well as without? Sure do! Works like a champ! Here is my M8 fully gripped out: This combo has let me handhold shots down to 1/6 sec (YMMV). As for testing the strength of the hot shoe - who here wants to volunteer their M8 for testing? Tim is an accomplished CAD operator and modeler. If you look at the Thumbs Up thread on RFF, the first pictures he posts are CAD models. The only danger the Thumbs Up poses to your gear would be in handing your camera to a butter-fingered gorilla (and most of us know one), and the damage generated would not be confined to the hot shoe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted October 18, 2007 Share #29 Posted October 18, 2007 1) Science doesn't UNIVERSALLY acknowledge ANYTHING. Neither do scientists. Vinay, I think Brent's got a point here and you short-change him a bit with your criticism. Scientific "laws" are really theories, and they only hold sway until disproved. The scientific paradigm whereby the Earth is the centre of the solar system was replaced by better science. Newton's "laws" of motion were good for a few hundred years, but Einsteinian relativity theory modified them considerably (and demonstrated that the "force" of gravity is no such thing, but merely the three-dimensional perception of the four-dimensional curvature of space-time ). Currently, physicists routinely account for atomic interactions with reference to subatomic particles which none of us have ever seen – and which science itself tells us we never will. The so-called Higgs Boson, required to make quantum theory work, hasn't even been detected. Heisenberg puts a limit on what's knowable at these degrees of magnitude in any case. So our whole subatomic understanding of the universe is, basically, a model that happens to work for us for the moment, albeit with an inbuilt level of unknowableness ("uncertainty")... but which will almost certainly be overturned or redeveloped in time. To think that our current view of the way that we, our world, and our universe work is somehow definitive strikes me as a very 19th-century view! The "laws" of maths are models, too. We have an anthropocentric view of the universe: we can't help it. Maths is our maths. With it we describe our universe. That doesn't make it universal. So when you say that science and scientists universally acknowledge certain things, I think you'd have to qualify that with something like, "for the time being" or "as a good model of how the universe may work" or "as far as our perceptions allow us to say". Or possibly I'm reading much more into this than Brent (or you) intended... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haribo Posted October 18, 2007 Share #30 Posted October 18, 2007 Forgot to mention, i use the M8 grip as well. Works great together. Carry camera exclusively in right hand with strap wrapped around my wrist. The Thumps Up makes a huge improvement, particular when I carry around my M8 mounted with a heavy Noctilux or 90 Apo. Also, nobody seemed to have noticed my earlier comment. The ugly logo/type is ONLY silk screened onto the devise. It is not engraved or anything like that. One can easily get rid of it with the some acetone or DeGooper. For the ones who engaged in a scientific p!$$ing match here over the Pro &Con's of the Thumps Up, let me say this: As contraceptive, condoms are only safe to about 90 something per cent. Well, that doesn't stop people from having sex. Or does it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted October 18, 2007 Share #31 Posted October 18, 2007 Also, nobody seemed to have noticed my earlier comment. The ugly logo/type is ONLY silk screened onto the devise. It is not engraved or anything like that. One can easily get rid of it with the some acetone or DeGooper. Harald, I spotted what you said! That's really good news. I wasn't sure what DeGooper was, but acetone I can easily get hold of. So you may have got the Thumbs Up another buyer... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haribo Posted October 18, 2007 Share #32 Posted October 18, 2007 Harald, I spotted what you said! That's really good news. I wasn't sure what DeGooper was, but acetone I can easily get hold of. So you may have got the Thumbs Up another buyer... DeGooper is not as aggressive as acetone. It takes a bit rubbing and it all comes off. Just don't go wild, particular with acetone. Or you might take off more than you want I am not associated with the Thumbs Up or Tim Isaac, its inventor. Which means, i couldn't care less who buys it or doesn't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmaurizio Posted October 19, 2007 Share #33 Posted October 19, 2007 We promised Tim a detailed review, since we use our LEICAs heavily for producing content for newspapers and magazines. So far, the results with the Thumbs Up are nothing short of spectacular. With a little practice, sharp pictures for editorial use (printing in offset or web press up to 11x17 for a double spread) at 1/2 sec exposures are easily obtainable (70% keepers). Our experience is that the longer model (model 3 I guess) is better than the short one. If your subject does not move a lot, as it happens in many times in photojournalism and reportage, you can use 1/4 sec speed. Combined with our Nocti 50mm and CV 35mm F1.2, we got impressive results. Our results in weddings and low light parties is also very good. Room for improvement? Maybe the curvature could be a little bit less, specially for those of us with large thumbs. The font of the logo can be improved too. The final test? Try using the M8 again without the TU.... Hope this helps. We are not affiliated nor received discounts for using TU. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 19, 2007 Share #34 Posted October 19, 2007 Patently untrue, unless one speaks of mad scientists, alchemists and others outside the realm of legitimate science. Laws of physics, mathematics and chemistry are universally accepted, to name a few. What scientists often disagree on is the interpretation of data, not the fact that anecdotal evidence is unreliable as a foundation for scientific conclusion. That statement is absolutely false. Even Einstein's theory of relativity has been questioned. Remember when there was "universal agreement" that nothing was faster than the speed of light? Well, guess what. That is no longer believed to be the case. At least, we all pretty much agree the world is still flat, right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 19, 2007 Share #35 Posted October 19, 2007 It would be entirely reasonable, just as it's reasonable to expect auto manufacturers to destroy their cars to determine their crashworthiness. Subjecting a product to more abuse than a user is likely to, is an accepted practise across the gamut of industries, and a major marketing tool. Timex watch dropped from a helicopter into the Grand Canyon, Samsonite luggage given to a cageful of gorillas, Bic pen shot from a rifle into a 2x4...the list goes on and on. Why not prove (or disprove) your point by torque testing the Thumbs Up on your own M8, then report back to us. Tim is hardly akin to the large businesses you mention. For him to ruin an M8 doing this kind of test would likely wipe out a year's worth of profits. We don't even expect that from Timex. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted October 19, 2007 Share #36 Posted October 19, 2007 Or possibly I'm reading much more into this than Brent (or you) intended... Not at all. That was precisely what I was getting at, only you expressed it much more eloquently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
usccharles Posted October 19, 2007 Share #37 Posted October 19, 2007 i've been using thumbs up model 1 on my camera for nearly 2 months and i won't go anywhere without it on my M8. its a great addition to the M8 and i highly recommend to anyone who owns an M8. i don't like the black finish and the writing that much either. i wish it was the same black finish as the black on the camera, but i would still use the thumbs up if it was bright pink and glowed in the dark. its really useful to keep your camera steady. mine has started to peel a bit and its showing brass in corners. kinda looks nice i have to say. i find that since the thumbs up rests right against the top plate of the M8, most of the pressure is absorbed on to the top plate instead of the hot shoe. its alot sturdier than people fear, atleast from personal experience. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_nyc Posted October 19, 2007 Share #38 Posted October 19, 2007 Thanks. Per AGeoJO's question, is anyone using it in combination with the handgrip? I actually stopped using the handgrip when I started using the ThumbsUp. My hands are on the small side and I found that it made it a little too much for me to hold on to. I do use it in conjuction with the Leica M8 Camera Protector, though. For me that combination give me just the right amount of grip for my normal wrist-strapped handholding. Before I got the ThumbsUp, the Camera Protector never really worked for me. As they say, "to each his own"... John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyvot Posted October 19, 2007 Share #39 Posted October 19, 2007 It would be more costly to machine and manufacture, but it would be huge to integrate a hot shoe pass-through into a future ThumbsUp design. Then, the thing could really become part of the camera full time. There are too many times when I've got a flash or accessory viewfinder on the camera... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haribo Posted October 19, 2007 Share #40 Posted October 19, 2007 It would be more costly to machine and manufacture, but it would be huge to integrate a hot shoe pass-through into a future ThumbsUp design. Then, the thing could really become part of the camera full time. There are too many times when I've got a flash or accessory viewfinder on the camera... I believe Tim is working on it. Guess, in a couple month or so there will be a version with a hot or cold shoe. 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.