Master photographers using the M8

[sliversurger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

not sure if these guys use leicas exclusively but if you want to learn about photography you might want to take a peek at these

 

Magnum Blog - the photo blog of Magnum Photos

 

Photojournalism - Photography, Video and Visual Journalism Archives - Lens Blog - NYTimes.com

 

or subscribe to LFI magazine as each issue has interviews with some great photogs using leicas. otherwise if you have any specific questions you can always contact leica masters directly via email or private posts.

[Advertisement]

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

[mikelc]

Artists often work by intuition and have a difficult time communicating in written language. Their opinions can be very subtle...they make complex associations that often sound disconnected and even crazy to the average hobbyist surfer.

 

Forums are...by their very nature....too democratic to carry anything more than a superficial conversation with a true master of anything. If a person really wants to learn from a master then he should find a way to make a personal (not a public) relationship with the photographer.

 

There is also the cliche that "anything worth knowing cannot be taught"

 

I'm confident that there will NEVER be a forum filled with conversations with masters. However, I'm equally confident that some amazing and famous photographers are surfing the forums and just keeping a low profile....who knows? Maybe some of them are reading and/or writing in this thread

 

...not sure i agree about the superficial here or that it needs to be...there was a thread here when i first joined about color: it's theories and use in painting and photography that was so interesting and stimulating that it got me to sign up for tutorials with Ben Lifson whose thoughts -along with Sean's-were a central part of that thread....i've been working with Ben ever since and have learned a great deal not only about my own work but about the art of picture making in general...so in that sense i agree with your thoughts about contacting and establishing a working relationship with an artist

 

mike

http://www.mikecetta

[dalippe]

I can't speak for what you are seeing but the visual structure of a picture made with an RF camera *can* be different because the photographer is seeing everything in the frame (near and far) clearly at once.

Well then, here's a discussion about the art/craft of using a rangefinder for photography!

 

Photographers on the LUF (and Sean in particular) often express a preference for the infinite DOF one gets through a RF viewfinder compared to an SLR. Sean (and others), does your preference for the RF depend upon working aperture? In particular, do you also prefer it at wider apertures where it is a poor preview of the final image? Wide open, the SLR view is a true preview of the photograph you will make. One would naively think the SLR view preferable in those cases. Of course if you usually work stopped down then the rangefinder gives a bright and reasonably accurate preview whereas the SLR forces you to choose between a poor preview or the dark view seen when using the DOF preview feature to stop down the lens before the exposure is made.

 

David

[zlatkob]

Great question!

[sean_reid]

Well then, here's a discussion about the art/craft of using a rangefinder for photography!

 

Photographers on the LUF (and Sean in particular) often express a preference for the infinite DOF one gets through a RF viewfinder compared to an SLR. Sean (and others), does your preference for the RF depend upon working aperture? In particular, do you also prefer it at wider apertures where it is a poor preview of the final image? Wide open, the SLR view is a true preview of the photograph you will make. One would naively think the SLR view preferable in those cases. Of course if you usually work stopped down then the rangefinder gives a bright and reasonably accurate preview whereas the SLR forces you to choose between a poor preview or the dark view seen when using the DOF preview feature to stop down the lens before the exposure is made.

 

David

 

From the first review I did of the R-D1:

 

"The core advantage of a rangefinder, for me, however, lies in the way in which it allows one to see and frame the picture before it’s captured. A rangefinder shows one the world through a window with lines indicating the picture’s borders. That allows one to look at what will and will not fall within those borders. In other words, one sees the world of the picture about to be made as well as the world just outside it. This can give one a greater sense of the ways in which the picture might change by either 1) changing the framing or 2) allowing elements outside the frame to move into the frame. Epson’s 1:1 finder takes this strength one step further. Since the finder shows the world at life size, one can work with both eyes open. One eye sees the world as it appears in the frame; the other watches the world outside the frame that may soon enter it. Or perhaps we could say that the right eye sees the trees and the left eye sees the forest.

 

Then there’s the issue of viewing depth of field. An SLR normally uses an automatic aperture that remains open during composition and only closes to its set aperture at the moment of exposure. So, let’s say the camera has a 50mm F/1.8 lens mounted and set to an aperture of F/8. The exposure will be made at F/8 of course but the viewing used to compose and choose the moment of the picture will be seen through the lens wide open. That means that one will only see a certain range of distance in the frame (usually the foreground subject) clearly, everything behind and ahead of that focus zone will be blurred. So while the film or sensor will “see” at F/8 when the exposure is made, the photographer sees at F/1.8. It’s hard for one to make a picture he or she can’t fully see. One can get around this using a depth of field preview button but that method tends to work better when the camera is on a tripod. When working handheld, using a DOF preview button can be cumbersome and makes for a dark finder where things are harder to see. The rangefinder has the opposite problem of showing all distances from the lens in focus. One process is additive and one is subtractive. With the SLR, one must see certain distances out of focus and imagine what they will look like in focus. With a rangefinder, one sees all distances in focus and must imagine what some of them will look like out of focus. I prefer the latter way of working."

 

That was written in 2004 but my own preferences have not changed. I find the subtractive process much better to work with and one of these days I'll get a cast of 20 actors together so that I can prepare the pictures needed for an article that illustrates how this works.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[scaryink]

I think the unique aspect of the RF is more related to the subject than the shutter clicker. It is just a far less noticeable kit and people aren't as aware nor intimidated by it. This simple fact makes all the difference when capturing images of people.

 

The RF is at its best in capturing the fleeting image of the human condition. Seeing within and without the frame is the same for me, from slr, rf through 8x10.

 

For me, the simple truth of the M8 are two things. Small form factor, high quality image.

[giordano]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the unique aspect of the RF is more related to the subject than the shutter clicker. It is just a far less noticeable kit and people aren't as aware nor intimidated by it. This simple fact makes all the difference when capturing images of people.

 

Where does this leave the ultra-compact SLRs such as the OM1 and Pentax MX, which are no bigger than an M?