RASO Posted August 27, 2009 Share #1 Posted August 27, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Took my D2 to a wedding as a point and shoot last weekend. Got spotted straight away by the hired pro with "Oh someone is still using a Leica!! Shame they dropped so far behind everyone technically speaking" Anyway the whole thing became quite a running joke for everyone else, as this pro made sure that he got a shot of everything I pointed at and ended with him presenting his equipment to everyone at the dinner table wanting to compare results in a mine is bigger than yours fashion. But more to the point, I usually photograph non moving subjects. Here I tried to capture somethings very quickly and forgot how slow the autofocus is. Shame. I can only recommend to focus manually. It is faster and more satisfying. Apart from that I still try to follow Thorstens routines of shooting 3. 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/94592-d2-irritates-pro-with-d3x-at-wedding/?do=findComment&comment=1006272'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 27, 2009 Posted August 27, 2009 Hi RASO, Take a look here D2 irritates Pro with D3x at wedding. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
FinnPirat Posted August 27, 2009 Share #2 Posted August 27, 2009 .. ended with him presenting his equipment to everyone at the dinner table wanting to compare results in a mine is bigger than yours fashion... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joppepop Posted August 27, 2009 Share #3 Posted August 27, 2009 Lovely photos, and an amusing story to accompany these. You would think a pro didn't have to justify himself like this, that it is the end result that counts. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted August 27, 2009 Share #4 Posted August 27, 2009 Yikes. If a pro thinks that the camera itself matters more than his ability, he won't be a pro for long.... or he should consider never comparing with an amateur, just to be safe I'm not sure what he was thinking...what an unpleasant way to treat a guest! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenor1 Posted August 27, 2009 Share #5 Posted August 27, 2009 Any photographer would be pleased with the detail captured on her wedding dress. I hope the bride kept her eyes open at least some of the time. My suggestion is to e-mail the a shot to that photographer. Those shots look fantastic! I'd love to see some shots of the wedding cake. It's always difficult to get a nice shot of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted August 27, 2009 Share #6 Posted August 27, 2009 There's some wedding photographers who invest in big cameras to convince clients they have very high costs to produce wedding shots. I've heard it a number of times from Hasselblad users and others. And also they like to have bigger gear than the guests so as to be "the professional" in the crowd. I would shoot wedding with D2 if I felt that was the best and most silent for the job, because my clients didn't see the equipment but only the pictures before they called. By the way, what the Digilux 2 most often signal is "Here's somebody who know how to use a camera, because he uses a small, old Leica." Maybe that's what hit him. The most "attacks" I get from other pro's are complaints that Leica is so expensive; which either mean they wanted it if..., or they imply that I was stupid not getting a Canon instead. They never say their gear is better. As for AF, what you do is pre-focus. You find something at the distance at what you expect to shoot, then lock the focus (it will light green and not blinking green when it has found it) and you keep it that way till you see action. The delay from there will be very little, and then you shoot three images. If you press the shutter first, you will never know how long the camera will take before it hits focus, so your timing will be completely off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffwros Posted August 27, 2009 Share #7 Posted August 27, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) If I saw somebody at one of my weddings with a Digilux 2, or any other Leica for that matter, I'd go out of my way to make a new friend! Too bad about the hired photographer ...good for you for getting some fun shots of the couple! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ismon Posted August 27, 2009 Share #8 Posted August 27, 2009 I've used Leicas exclusively for forty years of wedding photohgaphy. I switched to the Digilux 2 since it was introduced. I focus by scale. It's quick and works in the dark. The Jpg's are a delight to print. That Summicron ensures that I'm never caught changing lenses. It's a terriffic kit for spontaneous action. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveleo Posted August 27, 2009 Share #9 Posted August 27, 2009 hi there the quality of your D2 images are just great, despite the funny faces. * the "pro" that you dealt with is no "pro" at all .... a hapless fool in my book. * years ago i was a guest at a wedding and had my konica hexar (silver) snapshooting .... it caught the eye of the hired pro .... she kept looking over at me popping away .... finally she came over as nice as could be to see my Leica (ha!) up close .... we both got a laugh and she said "well, your hexar still looks funky even it's it's not Leica"..... and we laughed again. also, i once was snapshooting at a big party with my ancient Leica iiif, and the "pro" caught a glimpse of it, and every time i raised the camera, he was sure to step out of my way for a clear shot !! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianv Posted August 28, 2009 Share #10 Posted August 28, 2009 I was at a Museum at an open house and the staff photographer using a Nikon D2x spotted my F2AS with the 55/1.2 on it. "Using one of the OLD ones I see" he stated. "No, this is one of my new ones. I left the SP at home, wimped out and grabbed one with a meter." I'd like to see someone with a just a D3 say anything about a camera that I use. Just to add- was in a conversation with a wedding photographer that was complaining about dynamic range of Digital cameras, with blown highlights of the wedding dress. Told him to get a Leica and use a 5cm f1.5 Summarit. Lower contrast lenses on a digital prevents clipping. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted August 28, 2009 Share #11 Posted August 28, 2009 Great images and a better reminder of the day than the formal posed ones. I hired a Pro for my daughters wedding, she did a great job and was genuinely interested in my D2 and had a play. I had great fun just flitting around all day on the outskirts of the action and got some memorable shots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregbxl Posted August 28, 2009 Share #12 Posted August 28, 2009 nices pictures and funny story ! it reminds me my own wedding two years ago where some guests were laughing at my "official photographer" because he was using a film cam and not a digital one they were saying i had found a cheap guy with old cam and poor IQ... until they saw the pictures :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted August 28, 2009 Share #13 Posted August 28, 2009 I've done a couple of weddings, on a "gift to the happy couple" basis. I find the photography straightforward, the hard work is in marshalling the relatives. I wouldn't want to do it for a living! Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted August 28, 2009 Share #14 Posted August 28, 2009 You could always retort: "Yeah. But its such a shame Canon (or whomever . . .) can't make lenses that match the electronics." Or something like that. Every brand has its pluses & minuses. Give me better glass any day. I'll take a Leica (or Olympus) over Canon for what I do. If the lenses are superior, I can "make do" with the rest of the equipment that's behind them! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Essemmlee Posted August 28, 2009 Share #15 Posted August 28, 2009 You could always retort: "Yeah. But its such a shame Canon (or whomever . . .) can't make lenses that match the electronics." Or something like that. Every brand has its pluses & minuses. Give me better glass any day. I'll take a Leica (or Olympus) over Canon for what I do. If the lenses are superior, I can "make do" with the rest of the equipment that's behind them! I have a Canon 1ds 3 with L glass and find it absolutely impossible to agree with the declaration that Leica glass is in some way better. In many cases, other than the EXIF data, I can't tell which photo was taken on which camera. My M8 produces supreme prints but so does the Canon. Surely the photos being sought should dictate the glass being used. If, for example I'm photographing the MotoGP, the M8 and a 90/2.8 won't produce the required results that I can get from an autofocus, fast, 400/4 with the big, and heavy, Canon. Unless you know better??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
regedit Posted August 28, 2009 Share #16 Posted August 28, 2009 excellent pictures in a light that look difficult (every small angle can change the light quite a lot). you freeze a great moment in the last picture. i bet you didn't use continuous shot to grab that . and i bet on another thing too: you smile after every shot taken cuz you did it with a leica, while the pro didn't smile cuz he was "at work". pro or not, leica owners are a species apart. and you can see that in their way of taking pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted August 29, 2009 Share #17 Posted August 29, 2009 "I have a Canon 1ds 3 with L glass and find it absolutely impossible to agree with the declaration that Leica glass is in some way better." Well, of course you don't agree! That was the whole point. Personally, I think Canon makes some interesting lenses that are perfect for some purposes, especially when you need extremely fast, accurate & sophisticated focusing. But the purpose of my "suggested retort" wasn't "Truth"; it was to irritate a guy who was overly arrogant about his photo equipment. Regarding lenses, though, I've always found both Leica & Zuiko to have the best lenses in terms of optics for what I do. I don't need super fast focusing nor do I need to track subjects with my eye (thru the camera). I don't need multiple focusing points (altho I'm getting used to that). I don't need Face Recognition. Again, as in my previous post, there's a qualification: "for what I do". I have friends who buy the latest & greatest (and heaviest, not to mention expensive) equipment they can to do work that that doesn't require it. Why? Because they think it impresses their clients (from their mouths). Obviously, the guy at the wedding who was so obnoxious thinks his D3x makes him a better photographer. Sometimes the equipment gives you the perfect tool. And Sometimes it just gives you a perfect delusion to hide behind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenonzinonos Posted August 29, 2009 Share #18 Posted August 29, 2009 Great candid, unposed pics - well done! Are these straight out of the camera or did you do some 'work' on them? Reason I ask is that I have just purchased a LC1 on Ebay (should arrive any day now) and I am constantly amazed at the quality of the photographs which I see on various forums and blogs, but do not know how much manipulation has taken place before they are uploaded... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrethorst Posted August 29, 2009 Share #19 Posted August 29, 2009 As for AF, what you do is pre-focus. You find something at the distance at what you expect to shoot, then lock the focus (it will light green and not blinking green when it has found it) and you keep it that way till you see action. The delay from there will be very little, and then you shoot three images. If you press the shutter first, you will never know how long the camera will take before it hits focus, so your timing will be completely off. Aha. Thanks again, Thorsten. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RASO Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share #20 Posted August 31, 2009 Great candid, unposed pics - well done! Are these straight out of the camera or did you do some 'work' on them? Reason I ask is that I have just purchased a LC1 on Ebay (should arrive any day now) and I am constantly amazed at the quality of the photographs which I see on various forums and blogs, but do not know how much manipulation has taken place before they are uploaded... I actually have no experience with any post processing, so I just crop a little or adjust the exposure a touch. So pretty much straight from the camera. If you want to check the cameras capability you have to view Thorstens site or Thawley for workflow. I admit to being a complete copy cat in those respects in the hope of a learning curve. My experience is that it´s worth it to follow those routines as the result are just better. Again thanks Thorsten, Thawley and all for sharing these practical suggestions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.