new to photography, big question...

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I took my AF film on one trip trying to keep it all in bag. I got some wonderful shots. But I had hampered myself with all my Canon equipment. On one trip I took the 40D and an EOS 3 as a backup. Again the same problem. Next and all subsequent trips, including Munich and Austria at winter holiday time. My Leica's. One M7, with 28 f 2 asph, 35 f 2 asph and my 75 f l.4. I had half a brick of Fuji Provia 100 and shot 9 rolls. Hey I was there to have a good time not acting like a travel or editorial photographer (which I've been). Pixels, who cares and don't think Fuji, Kodak, Ilford and the rest are going to quietly fall away from film manufacturer. Shoot a roll or your favorite chromes and then shoot the exact same shot with a digital whizbang. Compare the two sets, be honest and see for your self.

 

Yes, be honest with yourself. It's not digital that was the problem, it was the do-it-all-for-you Canon that was the problem whether film or digital. I've compared drum-scanned Kodachrome 25 photos made with the Leica 280mm f/4 APO with 10MP files made with the same lens and the DMR @ISO 400. The Leicaflex SL is much easier to carry all day but for big prints I'll take the files from the DMR. Having seen what the DMR can do I've limited the prints from film to 11" x 14" because at larger sizes when compared side-by-side with chromogenic prints from the DMR the photos made on film are lacking in resolution and the grain becomes much too obvious for my taste. I have not made any large inkjet prints from the DMR files so I cannot compare those.

 

If you are only interested in posting images to the web then dare I say it, don't waste your money on a Leica M system at all, you simply don't need that level of quality.

 

Yes I agree.

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

In answer to megapixel equivalence of film, Eiger studios provide 8,000dpi scans of 35mm film equivalent to 64MP - this is real data.

 

I seriously doubt that it is all usable, or even real data. No way. Ever.

 

All one gets from such over-sampling is noise.

 

And to digress - photo-optical enlarging introduces degradation of the original negative, but somehow we achieve some spectacular results with enlargements. Noise is something we never worry about. Exceedingly smooth transitions of gradation is a virtue that survives such degradation. Another factor is acutance.

 

(for the rest - an ideal (and unrealistic) 100/lpmm negative through a 100/lpmm lens results in, at best, 60% of the potential. But things like edge contrast and acutance through grain sometimes creates a better impression of fidelity. Adding artificial grain to a digital image is not ever the same thing.)

 

Still, 8000 'dpi' (disputed term - samples-per is more rational) is just silly. Noise is all one gains.

[redbaron]

Careful Kenneth. You'll draw a lot fire for comments like that. Salgado shoots digital cameras. Try suggesting he's not a photographer.

 

To the OP, every choice is a compromise and only you can decide which factors are important to you. One issue that seldom rates a mention, but which has been a deciding factor for me, is power sources. All digital cameras need mains power, MPs use tiny button cells if you need the meter.

[Xmas]

Hi

 

Lots of fun arguments

 

The difference in resolution between a medium speed film (e.g. Delta100) and M9 you wont detect unless you are using a concrete block 'tripod', and modern lens.

 

There is a difference in signature in both mono and color, between digital and film, you may not like the difference...

 

Digital is instant you can email shot of Paris back to partner immediately, with suitable mobile phone.

 

Digital is more expensive, an M2 is 400GBP, cheap to have fixed, M9 x10 to buy, x2-10 to have fixed... when the warranty expires... - an M2 is nicer than a MP.

 

Learning photo shop or wet printing is difficult, both is only a little easier.

 

Film will get more difficult to obtain and the choice will reduce dramatically, but Leica may file for bankruptcy...

 

Noel

[wildlightphoto]

... Leica may file for bankruptcy...

 

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that anything is possible, so yes Leica might file for bankruptcty, California might fall into the ocean, and the sky may turn into pudding. The probability of these events actually happening is very small. Your calculator doesn't have enough zeros in it to calculate the probability, but theoretically you are correct, Leica may file for bankruptcy.

 

It's possible that a well-designed, well-made mechanical camera will be functional and repairable after a similarly-designed and built electronic camera is considered uneconomical to repair, but as much as I like the mechanical tools (I'm a mechanical engineer) the results I've been getting from the DMR leave my film photos in the dust of history.

 

To find this infinitely repairable mechanical camera you will have to avoid such convenience features as self-timers, slow shutter speeds and vertical-blade mechanical shutters. These are all non-repairable sub-assemblies that are no longer being produced and the machinery used to make them was scrapped decades ago. High-speed shutter timing assemblies made after the Leicaflex Standard type 1 are also non-repairable sub-assemblies. BTW the electronic components of my R4sP are fine; it's the mechanical parts that require service or are wearing out.

 

I have a solo gallery show scheduled in a few months and the photos in the exhibit were chosen for aesthetic and technical merit, not based on whether the photo was made with a film camera or a digital camera. Of the 40 or so photos in the exhibit, only 3 or 4 were made with film cameras. The vast majority were made with the DMR. YMMV.

 

My reading of this thread suggests that many are more enamored with the cameras than with photographs. I believe these people will be happier with an M4 or earlier mechanical M camera than with a digital CaNikon. However this doesn't make the photographs made with these cameras any better. I'm more interested in the photographs and I'll use the tool that produces the results I want. I want big gallery prints and a 35mm film camera doesn't do the job nearly as well as the DMR has for me.

[italy74]

4. The vast majority of people in the current generation really don't appreciate quality in media - be it photography, sound, or video. Whatever crap people can get for free is what they will use. They've never heard a high-end sound system, or watched HD movies or enjoyed really well taken and printed large photographic images, nor do they care. YouTube and FaceBook and iTunes are the new standards in media dissemination. Snap it on your cellphone and upload it - good enough!

 

Anyway, if you have a passion for photography and don't mind the absence of instant feedback, shoot film. I still enjoy the anticipation of seeing the developed film and sometimes being pleasantly surprised that my visualization is transformed into reality.

 

Great truths in a nutshell, bravo!

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Welcome, Jack.

 

For perspective, I've been making photographs since 1965 and was a professional for a number of years, using Leicas and Nikon F from the start. Today I shoot some 35mm, but mostly MF and LF.

 

If I were to start fresh today as I did in 1964, I would definitely use a digital camera and not presume that the camera I get first would be the camera I would have for life. I am going to make a strange recommendation: Panasonic (Lumix) DMC-G2. I would recommend the G1 model first if you can still get it. I recommend it because it will be gratifying right out of the box, and you can experiment with other lenses. (It adapts to very many brands and types of lenses). Voiglander now has a super-fast normal lens for it (25mm F/.95).

 

At the same time, it would be wonderful if you could also get a film Leica and a Summicron 50mm lens. That combination will show you what the traditional Leica is all about. I would recommend a Leica M4 (to be economical). Find a handy light meter and be happy. If money is not an issue, then a Leica M7.

 

With that setup you can make comparisons that consider your own style and preferences. You might then move up to the M9, or not! But you will be fully informed.

 

Best of luck

[Xmas]

Your calculator doesn't have enough zeros in it to calculate the probability, but theoretically you are correct, Leica may file for bankruptcy.

My calculator has an exponential capability so it could represent a value close to zero, but I don't think that would be necessary, the only question in my mind is how long, but that is subjective, so there is little point in a dialogue about it.

It's possible that a well-designed, well-made mechanical camera will be functional and repairable after a similarly-designed and built electronic camera is considered uneconomical to repair, but as much as I like the mechanical tools (I'm a mechanical engineer) the results I've been getting from the DMR leave my film photos in the dust of history.

All academic points if you need a M2 repaired you can take it to most repair shops e.g. the cost of a new shutter is pretty standard, prompt and not that expensive, similar repair for M8 or M9 and it needs to go back to Germany, and the cost is rather more. I can only assume you are not aware of the M8/M9 costs quoted, by Solms and the 3rd party repair costs.

 

If you sent an M2 back to Solms it would be more expensive, than a 3rd party maintenance and take longer.

 

It is how expensive is the camera to keep working, mechanical or digital is not the problem.

 

A new user deserves to be told this?

 

I hope your DMR is reliable, and you don't find out how costly some of the repairs may be.

 

To find this infinitely repairable mechanical camera you will have to avoid such convenience features as self-timers, slow shutter speeds and vertical-blade mechanical shutters. These are all non-repairable sub-assemblies that are no longer being produced and the machinery used to make them was scrapped decades ago. High-speed shutter timing assemblies made after the Leicaflex Standard type 1 are also non-repairable sub-assemblies. BTW the electronic components of my R4sP are fine; it's the mechanical parts that require service or are wearing out.

[/Quote]

I don't recollect saying infinitely? I'm aware there have been spares problems for decades. Only one of my M2 has a self timer, and I have rebuilt/refurbed self timers myself, for several cameras, because they have been damaged mechanically. Slow shutter speeds don't seem dissimilar,and most wont have suffered any wear or damage. Vertical blade metal shutters are a complete pig, and do give me lots of problems, but M2's don't have them. I understand about the later ball bearing shutters, but they are not impossible, to rebuild or cannibalize. I don't like working on them though.

The point is that buying an M2 for 400 GBP means that you can discard it if the repair is a fraction of 400 GBP, an M9 is more expensive.

A second hand M8 seems to be significantly cheaper than an MP, why do you think that may be?

I have a solo gallery show scheduled in a few months and the photos in the exhibit were chosen for aesthetic and technical merit, not based on whether the photo was made with a film camera or a digital camera. Of the 40 or so photos in the exhibit, only 3 or 4 were made with film cameras. The vast majority were made with the DMR. YMMV.

I hope you show goes well, my only problem with digital pics is I don't like some of them technically, for highlights or shadows, but that is a subjective thing...

Are you going to post details about venue and time? I don't have a digital camera so all of mine would be film. But I don't think such a % has any meaning.

My reading of this thread suggests that many are more enamored with the cameras than with photographs. I believe these people will be happier with an M4 or earlier mechanical M camera than with a digital CaNikon. However this doesn't make the photographs made with these cameras any better. I'm more interested in the photographs and I'll use the tool that produces the results I want. I want big gallery prints and a 35mm film camera doesn't do the job nearly as well as the DMR has for me.

I understand your statement, but no one has mentioned a CaNik in this thread & a larger % of the time I use a Canon P, not an M2, I'd recommend a Canon P over an M2. Would you say why did you not recommend a DMR, over a Ca/Nik,? Note a Canon P is faster handling than a M2, for me, _ at reloading film.

 

Noel

[wildlightphoto]

All academic points if you need a M2 repaired you can take it to most repair shops e.g. the cost of a new shutter is pretty standard, prompt and not that expensive, similar repair for M8 or M9 and it needs to go back to Germany, and the cost is rather more. I can only assume you are not aware of the M8/M9 costs quoted, by Solms and the 3rd party repair costs.

 

If you sent an M2 back to Solms it would be more expensive, than a 3rd party maintenance and take longer.

 

It is how expensive is the camera to keep working, mechanical or digital is not the problem.

 

Missing from this discussion of cost of ownership is the cost of consumables and the net depreciated value. If the cost of repair is a factor you should include these other factors as well. Also missing from this discussion is productivity. Low cost is pretty much irrelevant if the camera is not productive for me.

 

I hope you show goes well, my only problem with digital pics is I don't like some of them technically, for highlights or shadows, but that is a subjective thing...

 

Learn to use Photoshop's curves tool.

 

Are you going to post details about venue and time?

 

April 2011 at Blue Wing Gallery, Woodland CA. Opening night is typically the first friday of the month.

 

I don't have a digital camera so all of mine would be film. But I don't think such a % has any meaning.

 

It has meaning to those who believe that the technical quality of digital is inadequate. Judging from his jaw that dropped to the floor, his bugged-out eyes and his brain's scrambled speech center, the gallery owner felt quite the opposite at least when produced by the DMR. Once his speech center recovered his only question was "What camera are you using?" and his only response when I told him was that it certainly makes a difference.

 

Would you say why did you not recommend a DMR, over a Ca/Nik,?

 

I did not and will not recommend a CaNikon of any kind to anyone who prefers to use a Leica. I'll gladly recommend a DMR to those who don't mind the weight.

 

This is my last post in this thread. General application of specific digital/film comparisons is pointless because the conclusion can be skewed one way or the other depending on the choice of films and cameras. Compare the specific equipment and materials you're likely to use, and make your choice but don't turn it into a religion.

[jaapv]

All academic points if you need a M2 repaired you can take it to most repair shops e.g. the cost of a new shutter is pretty standard, prompt and not that expensive, similar repair for M8 or M9 and it needs to go back to Germany, and the cost is rather more. I can only assume you are not aware of the M8/M9 costs quoted, by Solms and the 3rd party repair costs.

I don't think you are aware of M8/9 repair costs. For instance, a new motherboard for the M9 is 320 Euro, a new shutter about the same (slightly less actually). Those prices are totally comparable to the price of a film M repair. The price only gets high if the part is expensive, like body shells or sensors. I am still smarting form a repair of my M4 that cost me 2000 DM (aka 1000 Euro) ...in 1979...

[Xmas]

I don't think you are aware of M8/9 repair costs. For instance, a new motherboard for the M9 is 320 Euro, a new shutter about the same (slightly less actually). Those prices are totally comparable to the price of a film M repair. The price only gets high if the part is expensive, like body shells or sensors. I am still smarting form a repair of my M4 that cost me 2000 DM (aka 1000 Euro) ...in 1979...

 

Hi Jaapv

 

I'm sorry your M4 repair was that expensive you could have got a replacement for that?

 

I now get mine repaired by 3rd party repairers some are ex-Leica,e.g.

 

M2/3/4 Rangefinder Restoration

 

I've not noticed any difference from them and Leica Luton (now closed alas) except that the 3rd parties tend to repair more and replace less, quality seems the same.

 

I got my costs from the Leica Boutique, and other information from M8 and M9 people, who have had repairs, and dialogue.

 

If an M2 repair was estimated at more than 250 GBP I'd part exchange for another. It means I don't have to do without a body...

 

My last repair (a M4 in '05) a shutter ribbon snapped (i.e. new blinds), was done as a general service, the camera had not been opened (from '68), in the 175 GBP, bracket, I got a viewfinder enhancement gratis same time. 'Red Dot's repairer is cheaper that the linked site. But less convenient for me, Solms is less convenient still. I've only ever had shutter ribbons snap (twice), wind on gears break(once), (so far) there is nothing else in a film M, I've had several M's for decades.

 

I note that I can buy a M8 some what cheaper than a similar MP, both second hand. The black paint MP had more to go wrong than a M2 so I was able to resist, just. I don't know why a M8 is cheaper do you?

 

Noel