zeroseven Posted September 21, 2009 Author Share #41 Posted September 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm sorry ,I've always understood that if you want depth of field preview you buy an slr with a dof button on it (no k1000 Pentax then ) not a Leica M .This is so basic that it isn't worth commenting on .I think mr Z is being rather disingenuous here and has done a fine job of winding a few people up . I'm extremely disappointed that you still regard me as a wind up merchant. My name and profession are publicly displayed in this thread and quite why you think I would benefit by being disrespectful to fellow photographers is bewildering to me. You have clearly missed the point that the fact that I bought an MP in the first place was to enable me to utilise the character of the Noctilux, a unique lens which I admire greatly (along with every other Leica lens I've encountered especially some of the macro variants). You comments seem to me to be worthy of somebody who feels they are being attacked in some way and are not able to respond in an eloquent manner. Thanks for the friendly responses, but to be accused of being a troll twice in the same thread is not exactly indicative of an open minded and friendly community Unbelievable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Hi zeroseven, Take a look here There's no 'Z' in Rangefinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted September 21, 2009 Share #42 Posted September 21, 2009 Some of the macro variants:confused: There is the 90 macro, and maybe in a generous mood one could classify the DR Summicron - err...which variants? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 21, 2009 Share #43 Posted September 21, 2009 Some of the macro variants:confused: There is the 90 macro, and maybe in a generous mood one could classify the DR Summicron - err...which variants? He was talking about Leica/Leitz lenses in general and I suspect the R series in this case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2009 Share #44 Posted September 21, 2009 This was about rangefinders, as I recall. But yes, there is no disputing the 100 apo-macro, 60 and up to a point 100/4.0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted September 21, 2009 Share #45 Posted September 21, 2009 it records whats in front of it yet lacks one of the most of the creative factors that turns a picture into a photograph ?? The answer to the question above: Ze Brain. A thing you are clearly lacking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted September 22, 2009 Share #46 Posted September 22, 2009 Out with the knives. Theres someone new with an opinion that might be different. It isnt heading for the billingham bag look how many lenses I have threads. Quick, stab it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 22, 2009 Share #47 Posted September 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) This thread seems to have proved two things: First, the M-style direct viewfinder plus coupled rangefinder is never unarguably superior to an SLR as a means of visualising the finished picture before pressing the button. In any situation each has advantages and disadvantages (except of course all those situations where the M-finder can't be used at all). Second, some M-users are astonishingly reluctant to admit this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 22, 2009 Share #48 Posted September 22, 2009 friends -- don't feed....... made yourself to look like a bit of a goose aaiiiii maitie! .....time to bring out the dental floss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 22, 2009 Share #49 Posted September 22, 2009 zeroseven Maybe it is time to step off the camera foot and into the subject being photographed. I find that rangefinders tend to dominate the way I shoot, they tend to be a bit on the stop start mode unless I play the hyperfocal distance game. That's why I am tending towards the new X1 as it has the option of auto and I can concentrate on the image needs not wrestle with a camera. The epson RD1 is great is all I am doing is taking photographs and as I rarely go out with that intent only and other things hold as much sway............ a shallow DPF is out of the question. Maybe you are asking too much from the camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 22, 2009 Share #50 Posted September 22, 2009 Interesting thread, but I'm not sure I really understand the OP's point. SLR - you see the plane of focus at full aperture, and if your SLR has a DoF preview button you can also get an idea of the actual Dof at a chosen aperture. Rangefinder - you see everything 'in focus' and cannot have a DoF preview (unless you chimp an M8/9 image and try again as necessary). I reiterate what I said in my previous response, it's simply about knowing your equipment through practice and experience - equally valid for either system. I sometimes check DoF on my SLR's but mostly rely on my knowledge of the likely outcome. Where it has been essential was in checking the effect of masks and special effect filters, but most of that kind of stuff is done in PS now anyway! The OP seems to be creating a problem that doesn't really exist in the real world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 22, 2009 Share #51 Posted September 22, 2009 The OP seems to be creating a problem that doesn't really exist in the real world. It may not exist for that unlikely individual the average Leica photographer - but I can assure you that it really does exist in the real worlds of technical and product photography and cinematography. Sometimes one has to get the depth of field just so in order to get the image one needs, and it takes a ground-glass screen - or careful work with a tape measure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 22, 2009 Share #52 Posted September 22, 2009 It may not exist for that unlikely individual the average Leica photographer - but I can assure you that it really does exist in the real worlds of technical and product photography and cinematography. Sometimes one has to get the depth of field just so in order to get the image one needs, and it takes a ground-glass screen - or careful work with a tape measure. John, I did say there are specific situations where it is necessary to check DoF - as with your examples above, if these are the needs then clearly a Leica M isn't the ideal camera, just as it isn't the ideal camera to use under water or where long telephoto lenses are required. Horses for courses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 22, 2009 Share #53 Posted September 22, 2009 Out with the knives. Theres someone new with an opinion that might be different. It isnt heading for the billingham bag look how many lenses I have threads. Quick, stab it. Agreed. The forum is verging on the unreadable lately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted September 22, 2009 Share #54 Posted September 22, 2009 Hello Bill, did you used to organise Leica user meets in London a few years ago? I was due to attend and take part in a december(ish) photo comp you may have once organised. In the end I couldn't attend due to work commitments Yes, that's me. That was the first One Challenge. Since then we've been to Amsterdam, Paris, Berlin, Krakow and this year Valetta. Strange how things move on Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted September 22, 2009 Share #55 Posted September 22, 2009 The answer to the question above: Ze Brain. A thing you are clearly lacking. Tolerant as ever, Ned. Don't know why you bother to mix with us mere mortals. Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted September 24, 2009 Share #56 Posted September 24, 2009 It may not exist for that unlikely individual the average Leica photographer - but I can assure you that it really does exist in the real worlds of technical and product photography and cinematography. Sometimes one has to get the depth of field just so in order to get the image one needs, and it takes a ground-glass screen - or careful work with a tape measure. If you can use a tape-measure, or take the time to preview dof on ground glass, then surely chimping the dof on the camera screen (digital) or simply doing some dof bracketing if you are on film would work just fine. For sure - if you really want to see the dof effect in camera, before taking the shot, then a rangefinder is not the camera for you... but isn't that rather obvious? It seems as though on the one hand people are arguing that they want to shoot fast and on the other hand suggesting the camera is deficient because it doesn't provide a feature that would basically preclude you from shooting fast (dof preview). Of course, an SLR does give you instant dof preview of your lens wide open... but if you're using the Noctilux, and you want to use it wide open, then you get the bokeh you're given. Being able to preview it won't make it any different Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.