Why I love and hate the Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, pippy said:

This might be a very good time to post a link to Edward Steichen's extraordinary photograph of Gloria Swanson. Easily one of my favourite portraits of all time;

https://venetianred.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/edward-steichene28094gloria-swanson-1924.jpg

Philip.

Indeed, but in many ways that illustrates my point.  Oh, if we could all be Edward Steichen!

 Have no doubt that that the depth of field in that photo was not a mistake!

[Olaf_ZG]

10 hours ago, pippy said:

This might be a very good time to post a link to Edward Steichen's extraordinary photograph of Gloria Swanson. Easily one of my favourite portraits of all time;

https://venetianred.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/edward-steichene28094gloria-swanson-1924.jpg

Philip.

 But he hid her nose behind a curtain…

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb pippy:

This might be a very good time to post a link to Edward Steichen's extraordinary photograph of Gloria Swanson. Easily one of my favourite portraits of all time;

https://venetianred.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/edward-steichene28094gloria-swanson-1924.jpg

Philip.

This is an excellent portrait, but I do not really see, how this contributes to the shallow DoF or short distance discussion.

Although it looks like a close-up due to the "curtain", there is not much perspective distortion on the face, so it looks like a longer distance and long focal length.

Also the depth of field is not really shallow as the curtain as well as the eyes are inside the DoF.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

This is an excellent portrait, but I do not really see, how this contributes to the shallow DoF or short distance discussion......the depth of field is not really shallow as the curtain as well as the eyes are inside the DoF.

Perhaps, 3D-Kraft, it might appear that way when seen on-screen but, having seen an original print of the photograph up close in the 'real world', I assure you that the eyes are not perfectly sharp and D-o-F falls off extremely quickly behind the surface of the veil.

It would be interesting to know what f/length of lens was used but I'm not sure if such information was recorded at the time. Apparently the pic was the result of a piece of good-fortune; Steichen had 'finished' the (rather lengthy) photo session and draped the lace over her face as a bit of a joke. "The rest....."...... as the saying has it...

I've had a brief google to see if such equipment details are readily available on the www and had no luck on that score but did come across this article which, although not relevant to the OP, some members might find to be of interest;

https://fstoppers.com/editorial/treasure-chest-unpublished-eighty-year-old-edward-steichen-portraits-unearthed-47213

Philip.

Edited December 10, 2024 by pippy

[pippy]

On 12/10/2024 at 4:26 AM, IkarusJohn said:

...Oh, if we could all be Edward Steichen!... Have no doubt that that the depth of field in that photo was not a mistake!

For a few days I've been debating with myself whether I should post the next snap and for a number of reasons. For one thing it's not (quite) on-topic but predominantly because it might seem as though I was positioning myself alongside E. Steichen which, as if it needed to be said, is an absolute No-No.

The pic shown here was part of a second-year student project and was taken several years before I had ever seen the 'Swanson' photograph. Main difference (skill-levels apart) is that whereas Steichen focussed on the veil I tried to focus on the eyes. Shooting 5" x 4" with available light so a case of Cross One's Fingers and Hope For The Best;

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!

Philip.

[LocalHero1953]

7 hours ago, pippy said:

For a few days I've been debating with myself whether I should post the next snap and for a number of reasons. For one thing it's not (quite) on-topic but predominantly because it might seem as though I was positioning myself alongside E. Steichen which, as if it needed to be said, is an absolute No-No.

The pic shown here was part of a second-year student project and was taken several years before I had ever seen the 'Swanson' photograph. Main difference (skill-levels apart) is that whereas Steichen focussed on the veil I tried to focus on the eyes. Shooting 5" x 4" with available light so a case of Cross One's Fingers and Hope For The Best;

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!

Philip.

Picking up on your theme, and not commenting on your photo (which I like), I find myself in so many situations where I have a choice of which element in the composition to focus on and almost inevitably pick the wrong one. I wish there was a club judge's rule about it like the rule of thirds. Perhaps I should just adopt 'f8 and be there' or revive the f/64 group.

[Altair]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just a quick update, in case someone else is thinking of jumping on the M train and is wondering how I am doing.

 

I actually progressed fairly quickly, once the initial adjustment going from a full auto focus mindset to full manual and a rangefinder is over, getting used to the rangefinder is actually easier than I thought it would be. I just came back from a London trip where I only had the M11 and 35 APO and had a great time, made some fantastic images ( this lens is surprisingly versatile by the way ) and perhaps most importantly, my hit rate with the 35 shot wide open at F2 was surprisingly high the whole time. I would say I did about 80% tack sharp. I am somewhat frustrated I can't choose what to focus on as early as I would on an EVF but again, the rangefinder concept demands a different mentality and rewards with fresh perspective and a genuinely new photography experience.

 

Overall, I am loving the M more and more, and hating it less and less with each passing day.

 

With that in mind, now feeling like I am a somewhat experienced rangefinder user, or at least used to the experience, I dropped by the Leica store and wanted to try the SL3 just for the sake of it. I loved allot about the camera and focusing was super easy and precise, but still preper my M11 for it's size, design, and build quality.

 

Would i still go for a hybrid camera that bridges the gap between the M and SL? Basically an M with an EVF and advanced focus assist?

I would have said absolutely last week, now I say most likely. I do see the charm of the rangefinder, and now that it's second nature I am starting to enjoy using it, but I would still trade that charm in for a greater success rate. Especially true with the Noct 0.95 ( not tested but assuming ) 

 

Bottom line, enjoying the M11 to bits, very exited to see what the M12 and Leica come up with next. I have a hunch some exciting cameras are coming in soon

Edited December 12, 2024 by Altair

[LocalHero1953]

27 minutes ago, Altair said:

With that in mind, now feeling like I am a somewhat experienced rangefinder user, or at least used to the experience, I dropped by the Leica store and wanted to try the SL3 just for the sake of it. I loved allot about the camera and focusing was super easy and precise, but still preper my M11 for it's size, design, and build quality.

 

You haven't asked for advice, and you certainly haven't asked for mine, but I would strongly advise you NOT to buy or use another camera until the M rangefinder has become part of your instinctive photography practice. If you keep switching between systems that will not happen. You say you are "frustrated I can't choose what to focus on as early as I would on an EVF" but this will come with practice and experience. Of course no one is obliged to stick with a camera if they don't want to, but if one starts with a desire to become a M photographer, then there are no quick ways beyond using it and using just it.

/unwanted advice

Edited December 12, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[3D-Kraft.com]

Thanks for the update. As I wrote already in the beginning: The camera. you have in mind (compact like an M, EVF, same sensor like M11 and SL3) for a higher hit rate with a 0.95 Noctilux exists as Sony A7CR and even provides an option to use Leica lenses with AF (using the LM-EA9, but not sure, how good that adapter will work with the 0.95 Noctilux).

Edited December 12, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[jaapv]

But that Sony does not play too well with quite a few wideangle M lenses….

[lct]

1 hour ago, Altair said:

Would i still go for a hybrid camera that bridges the gap between the M and SL? Basically an M with an EVF and advanced focus assist?

A good way to know is to put a Visoflex 2 on your M11.

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 25 Minuten schrieb jaapv:

But that Sony does not play too well with quite a few wideangle M lenses….

Yes, but here we are talking about improving hit rate with a Noctilux 50/0.95 in a compact format and not a general purpose replacement for an M.
Yes, the sensor stack is not designed for most wide angle M lenses of the analog film era (even though also there are some examples that play well).

[Smudgerer]

16 minutes ago, lct said:

A good way to know is to put a Visoflex 2 on your M11.

I wouldn't use any Visoflex myself but your suggestion for the OP's posting makes a lot of sense...........

[charlesphoto99]

3 hours ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Thanks for the update. As I wrote already in the beginning: The camera. you have in mind (compact like an M, EVF, same sensor like M11 and SL3) for a higher hit rate with a 0.95 Noctilux exists as Sony A7CR and even provides an option to use Leica lenses with AF (using the LM-EA9, but not sure, how good that adapter will work with the 0.95 Noctilux).

Sure, the solution for using a $10k Leica rangefinder lens is to buy a Sony body.... (insert face palm emoji here). 

[Dazzajl]

42 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Sure, the solution for using a $10k Leica rangefinder lens is to buy a Sony body.... (insert face palm emoji here). 

It would be a legitimate way to get the best out of the lens. If you’re being ease/results driven. 

[charlesphoto99]

12 minutes ago, Dazzajl said:

It would be a legitimate way to get the best out of the lens. If you’re being ease/results driven. 

Or for the ultimate in ease just get a Sony and their *only* $2K 50mm f1.2 to begin with, and put the rest in the bank. 

[Altair]

What? A Sony body for my Leica glass? That defeats the whole concept.

 

I am simply sharing my journey here, by no means am I complaining or bashing the M, on the contrary it is a very pure unique and enjoyable experience. But it does have its limitations and is not for every situation. Which is why I also have a X2D and a Z9. They all serve very different purposes. My X2D and Z9 are all i need to be honest, the reason I got into Leica was for the joy of it. 

 

What i love about my M11 setup:

 

Image quality

Portable size

Build and materials quality

Unique and challenging new photography method

 

What i don't like:

Less than ideal successful shot percentage, though this has improved drastically 

 

The fact that I can't frame the image as early as I do with my other cameras. I don't like bending and kneeling, would rather the camera does the articulating.

The rangefinder has not been advanced to tackle the issue of overly light or dark scenes being particularly difficult to dial in.

 

I am currently only using my M11 and will keep doing so for at least another 3 months, by then I should be adept at M photography, at least enough to see if I can get what I need out of it in addition to enjoying the experience.

 

There is one aspect of Leica M photography that no other cameras matches. The fact that I can take a fairly mundane everyday object and make for a magical photo out of it, mainly thanks to the glass. Whenever I need a reminder of why i got into Leica I pull out the noct 0.95 and take a shot wide open and I rember why immediately. Only Leica does that, turn the ordinary into extraordinary.

 

Of course it's also the sensor and colour science in addition to the glass, but those three together and the resultant images, coupled with the fact the package is so exquisitely well made, are why I put up with the negatives I pointed out. Of course I hope the next iteration will further eliminate those issues 

 

[Dazzajl]

4 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Or for the ultimate in ease just get a Sony and their *only* $2K 50mm f1.2 to begin with, and put the rest in the bank. 

Well yes, if we’re going to be entirely logical here but where’s the fun in that?

[3D-Kraft.com]

  

vor einer Stunde schrieb charlesphoto99:

Sure, the solution for using a $10k Leica rangefinder lens is to buy a Sony body.... (insert face palm emoji here). 

This is different, to what I said, but if you feel better twisting other's statements, I don't want to spoil your fun.

Of course, the visoflex is another option to increase successful percentage - for me, however, one of the worst and least aesthetic.

vor 36 Minuten schrieb charlesphoto99:

Or for the ultimate in ease just get a Sony and their *only* $2K 50mm f1.2 to begin with, and put the rest in the bank. 

Of course, this would be the easiest option delivering the best results. But it is huge, cannot deliver the "0.95" magic and the optical imperfections of the Noctilux, which many interpret as "character" (and which also prompted me to buy the Noctilux 50/1 a second time - preferably used on the Sony A1, where it is both more balanced and delivers more accurate results).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[charlesphoto99]

29 minutes ago, Altair said:

The fact that I can't frame the image as early as I do with my other cameras. I don't like bending and kneeling, would rather the camera does the articulating.

The rangefinder has not been advanced to tackle the issue of overly light or dark scenes being particularly difficult to dial in.

 

So glad you're getting with it. The most important thing with M's is the mind set. Embrace the mystery of not knowing exactly what the image is going to look like.

That said, I'm confused with your statements above. I guess you mean that unlike an EVF, the rangefinder window doesn't show you what the final exposure will be. But this was true with optical SLR's as well, so really it's about learning exposure, and keeping that mini-calculator going on in your head at all times, and not necessarily about a limitation of the M. 

And the first about framing. That will become faster and faster as you master focus. I remember decades ago after getting my first roll back from my newly acquired M6. The optics all seemed 'off.' It took me a second, but then I realized that I was so focused on focusing, I was forgetting to recompose. it's all about a lot of small movements. I was always amazed at watching my young son use his X-Box controller, that I was absolutely useless at. Then I realized that shooting an M is very much like that.