Options
Borrowed a Leica M6 TTL 0.85
Which would you rather carry around?
Been meaning to do this for a while. Hating the big DSLR thing right now for my people photos (it's a phase, obviously) and despite dabbling in flash and lighting, I'm an unabashed "available light" guy. My friend happens to have an idle M6 and a 35mm Summilux ASPH (for the uninitiated, Leica's f/1.4 lens line—a real premium piece of glass here) so I took receipt of it an hour ago for a week, maybe longer. Partly inspired by The Online Photographer's call to action, I'll try to document the experience here with a camera that most of us SLR people have never, and will never have the opportunity to try. I'm less than enthusiastic about dealing with the timeframe and cost of film, and quite how I intend to get these into digital form I'm not sure.
Despite a rangefinder's long list of down sides, the benefits for somebody who shoots candidly is beguiling:
• Quiet shutter. To work unobtrusively is my highest goal.
• Small size. It's not light weight (!) but it sure is wee in comparison to my DSLR. Just look at the lenses! That's the size for an f/1.4 lens that God himself intended. With that hood off, it's tiny.
• The system is designed for the kind if thing I want to be doing.
• All primes; very, very fast glass is available—as fast as f/0.95. I tend to gravitate toward these type of lenses naturally.
• I'm finding the DSLR and lens combo to be making me very self-conscious, as I do not do this professionally, and even if I did, the noise and size of my DSLR is a drag in candid settings. It has made me favor the 50 f/1.4 partly for size and non-show-off-y appearance, apart from the fact it's a favorite FL.
hoping this will augment my photography in certain areas.
I'd be interested to hear from any grinners who are RF shooters. We don't have a forum for it here, but we should.
Been meaning to do this for a while. Hating the big DSLR thing right now for my people photos (it's a phase, obviously) and despite dabbling in flash and lighting, I'm an unabashed "available light" guy. My friend happens to have an idle M6 and a 35mm Summilux ASPH (for the uninitiated, Leica's f/1.4 lens line—a real premium piece of glass here) so I took receipt of it an hour ago for a week, maybe longer. Partly inspired by The Online Photographer's call to action, I'll try to document the experience here with a camera that most of us SLR people have never, and will never have the opportunity to try. I'm less than enthusiastic about dealing with the timeframe and cost of film, and quite how I intend to get these into digital form I'm not sure.
Despite a rangefinder's long list of down sides, the benefits for somebody who shoots candidly is beguiling:
• Quiet shutter. To work unobtrusively is my highest goal.
• Small size. It's not light weight (!) but it sure is wee in comparison to my DSLR. Just look at the lenses! That's the size for an f/1.4 lens that God himself intended. With that hood off, it's tiny.
• The system is designed for the kind if thing I want to be doing.
• All primes; very, very fast glass is available—as fast as f/0.95. I tend to gravitate toward these type of lenses naturally.
• I'm finding the DSLR and lens combo to be making me very self-conscious, as I do not do this professionally, and even if I did, the noise and size of my DSLR is a drag in candid settings. It has made me favor the 50 f/1.4 partly for size and non-show-off-y appearance, apart from the fact it's a favorite FL.
hoping this will augment my photography in certain areas.
I'd be interested to hear from any grinners who are RF shooters. We don't have a forum for it here, but we should.
0
Comments
Brilliant camera - awesome.
If you get the hang of shooting with a rangefinder (and manual at that) you'll love it.
RF shooting is a different style - no TTL view to start with.
Focusing and frame alignment can be an issue (especially with the 0.85) but the eventual results will be very pleasing.
I shoot a bevy of RF cameras, favourites being Contax G1 and G2, auto focusing, metered and Zeiss glass.
What more is there to say
p.s. I bet you'll find it difficult to hand back to your friend!
The Summilux has a focusing ring that has this handle on it with a finger notch in the middle. I'm sure a long-time Leica user could explain it to me, but the placement of this thing seems like it's in the wrong place. As you turn the focus ring—which has no texture, ribbing or contour of any kind—this handle, which is all you can grip, travels along the bottom third of the ring. I don't find that my fingers intuitively fall into the notch, or indeed around the sides of the handle. The hand falls naturally under the lens, as though you are cradling it from below, with both thumb and fingers supporting it's weight. This handle falls in the middle of that. If you put your thumb in the notch, your forefinger naturally goes on top of the lens barrel, at 12 o'clock. This blocks the rangefinder. I don't get it yet.
It's a shame you cannot see the SS or aperture settings in the viewfinder, but maybe that's what makes the Leica experience what it is. Still, it was easy to operate with your eye in the finder, and the mirrorless design had me worrying about my shutter speed much less than I would have on an SLR. It was refreshing to have such a minimum of control and also made me feel like I had a lot to give up.
The metering system works with 3 LEDs; two arrows and a dot to indicate exactly what you'd expect. Nicely, the arrows point in the direction that either the aperture ring or the shutter dial must turn to achieve a correct exposure. On the M6, you only have single stops: 1sec, 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 125, 250, 500 and 1000, and bulb and a stop at 1/50s for flash sync. A lot of the time, the meter indicates you are about a half-stop from optimal. The aperture ring can be moved in half-stop increments, so I found myself sometimes compensating to the meter with half-stop aperture adjustments. When I get this first batch back from the lab, I can see how much these half-stop under- and over-exposures are affecting the results. The bummer here is that all exposure compensation has to be done in your brain. You only know what a "correct" exposure is to the meter and you need to think about the settings to compensate for, say a dark environment you want to portray as dark, or for something light, like snow. You cannot simply look at the meter and see how far away your exposure adjustments are taking you from the meter's "proper" exposure. All part of "The Leica As Teacher" I should think.
The VF is very bright and looks great. There is only a 35mm with this camera and the 0.85 version has its largest field of view lines for the 35mm, so I can effectively use the whole VF and haven't had to use any of the other lines. The benefit you hear a lot, that the VF lets you see what's outside the frame, aiding compositional choice, hasn't dawned on me yet for the reason I've explained above. I still have no concept of parallax error and the other things that affect RF shooters so I have it easy for now. Ignorance is bliss.
Without having seen the results yet, the experience is pretty great. It takes me back to my OM-1, minus the TTL composing. I love the size. It's exactly what a personal camera is supposed to look and feel like. I'm not getting that feeling the DSLR gives me in public, which I find is a disincentive to being the kind of person who carries the camera "everywhere" with himself. The manual focus, I actually enjoy very much. It's terrible with moving subjects coming closer or going farther away and kids—forget it unless they're pretty stationary. But the method is easy to understand and I imagine people get good at fast, accurate focusing of moving objects with experience. I have no plans to give up shooting DSLRs!
I'm seriously not looking forward to all the film processing and scanning costs, which may become a bane. Then I think about the cost of an M9 and it doesn't seems so bad.
More to come and examples of some amateurish figuring-out in the near future.
The Contax has some serious appeal
Forgot to mention a few extra points of a Contax G2
a) VF shows focus point/distance
b) VF shows shutter speed
c) 1/10th the price of a Leica - body and lenses
d) Glass equal to Leica easily (and not just my opinion)
Current Ebay listings show - G2 with 28, 45 and 90mm lenses c.$1,000!
You should try Fuji Acros in Black and white - awesome stuff.
See the exif info and more outside dusk shots in the gallery here.
A lot cheaper than an M9 also. I even have some old Olympus glass from my OM-2
But you will get the bokeh with an M9, of course.
Cool Halloween shots.
We're still waiting for a good quality digital range finder other than a Leica.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Will those work in the GF1? If so, ebay, here I come.
I guess this really is more a function of sensor size than of the aperture of the lenses. With my 5D, there would have been great bokah in shot #3 even at f/2.8. But if micro 4/3 takes off, there will probably eventually be faster lenses.
Thank you.
Well, you know I do cheat by being pretty good at post processing. Still, it's apples to apples with me because I was also doing that with my 5DmkII images.
John, I don't have a GF1, although I am considering one. So all I know is what I see on the web. Here are a few links about lenses for Micro 4/3s - there is even a rental source of lenses here - http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.08.20/micro-4-3-legacy-lenses
http://www.cameraquest.com/adaptnew.htm
http://www.cameraquest.com/adp_micro_43.htm
http://www.cameraquest.com/adp_micro_43_fd.htm
This last link does mention an adapter for Olympus OM lenses but I don't see a picture of one here.
The GF1 has a very shallow lens mount to sensor plane distance, which allows adapters for almost all other interchangeable lenses although in manual focus, manual mode usage if I understand these links correctly.
If I am incorrect, please feel free to correct my errors.
As you are well aware, DOF is deeper at a given aperture for smaller formats than larger formats. So Micro 4/3s will have more DOF than a full frame camera all other things being equal. On the other hand, a 100mm f2.0 Zeiss Macro Planar on a GF 1 body will have the tele view of a 200mm lens on a full frame camera, but with an f2.0 aperture. That ought to provide adequately shallow DOF I would think.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Kind of defeats the purpose of this camera. Might as well bring the 5D with 50mm f/1.4.
For me the point of this camera is to be able to get really close with a fairly wide lens and not have people absolutely freak out. Oh, and fits in a jacket pocket, is good.
The GF1 is the camera that will prompt me to sell my Pentax ME with 40mm 2.8 pancake. Love that little thing, but the GF1 is smaller, and, well, digital.
In fact, I'm interested in where this thread has gone in terms of DSLR alternatives - the EP-1 and GF1 are on my radar.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
SO I think the question of size of camera is worth exploring. But once you start talking about rangefinder Leicas ( whether digital or film ) other cameras can be considered as well. Like the GF1.
I have been waiting for Canon ( who once upon a time, along with Nikon, built lovely rangefinders ) to bring back a real world class digital rangefinder ( full frame or even APS sensor ) but it does not look like it is gonna happen.
Panasonic, a camera 'outsider' has jumped into the fray with a worthwhile contender, at less than 1/4 of the cost of a digital Leica and an appropriate lens. The GF1 with glass will cost less than the best Leica glass without a body even. Hard to ignore that. Hard for you too, apparently, John.
The ability of the GF1 to use so many alternate lenses will be attractive to many shooters, just not "street shooters" perhaps. Remember though, the Leicas all the street shooters used in the past, were all manual focus lenses also..... SO the GF1 may not be at that big of a disadvantage in focusing after all with manual lenses. F8 and be there!
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
On the other hand, I love its autofocus. Very impressive, and much better at picking focus points that any Canon I've used.
Look, I bought this camera and lens for a very particular purpose, and it's doing that job amazingly well. I feel that when I use this camera I'm making some of the same kind of compromises vs big Canon dSLRs that HCB made vs the large and medium format cameras favored by all the famous photographers who came before him. I think that's what he meant when he said, "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."
The last week with the M6 has taught me to love manual focus again. Perhaps it's that a rangefinder is simply built to focus with your eyes and your hands. When you land the correct tool, it can make a previously insufferable job enjoyable. Like when you buy a really great bread knife. I am unabashedly in favor of camera automation but except for a few instances, I'm feeling free of it in a great way. I haven't felt this in charge of a camera in 25 years. The other thing to love is that 1/15s is no longer a deal breaker for handholdability. I'm very curious to see if that makes up for the lack of ISO muscle I've come to expect in the D700/D3.
The other, more rather expected, effect of this experiment is that I now look upon DSLRs as hulking, massive attention-getters and it's only until you understand why having no mirror box affects the size of the camera and lens, do you start to realize the RF form-factor's diminutive build is in no way a compromise in image quality—in fact it's the opposite. It's hard for me not to begrudge the poor SLR these traits now. When you need to see through the lens, however, there's no substitute. Just another way of working.
I have a couple of rolls at my lab being developed and scanned and I'll have them Weds afternoon. Let's see if the results in any way support the love I'm feeling.
Thanks to whomever suggested Neopan 400. Picked up a couple of rolls this morning to try out.
G2 is a really cool camera. They were clearly on the losing side of history when this was released, but now, quite an amazing deal. I think the thing that would keep me from buying one (at least first) is the preponderance of features. Part of the exercise is to love manual again. The G2 seems like a brilliant hybrid, if that's what you're angling for.
Manual focusing is via a turn-wheel on the body with correct focus indicators and distance available in the VF. Very very accurate method.
Autofocus is great with moving subjects as "continuous" AF is available.
Now, here's an interesting spin off - there's an adapter available to fit the superb and Leica busting Contax G lenses to (say) a GF1, Gh1, G1!
These Zeiss G lenses can be got for a few hundred dollars each at present! And the 45mm F2 is generally regarded as the finest sharpest 35mm lens ever!
Interesting developments for sure
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11575
I did not quite remember the amount of grain inherent in 400 speed B&W film (These are Tri-X and HP5 Plus—not sure which, gotta look at my negs) but grain is not an enemy of sharpness, nor of aesthetics, so it just is what it is and I sort of understand why people want to emulate grain in their post processing. I can't say I like it or hate it. It just is.
One thing that really stands out to me about the Leica, is that the majority of my people shots, even the ones in exterior darkness, tend to have the faces properly exposed. In my digital SLR life, I am constantly looking at shots where the faces tend to be dark and ruddy after the matrix metering exposed for something other than the face I pointed the camera at. Liking this simplistic metering—it's working for me.
None of these test shots are supposed to be anything resembling good photography and I clearly need to do a little black-point work, etc.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
The limitations imposed on me by this way of working is actually wonderful. It also makes me think, with hand-holdability like this, who needs ISO 6400? (Okay, not really. But still, 1/8s or 1/15s was always an impossibility in reflex-land)
The concept of pre-focusing is beginning to dawn on me. There's this finger grip around the focus rings of many Leica lenses that was baffling at first, but now I can see it's a way of fostering muscle-memory and also giving the photographer a reference of where the lens is focused by feel. I have been told to set the focus ring to infinity after each shot so you only have to move it in one direction as you get ready to make an image. Furthermore, the grip at 6 o'clock (stright down in other words) is 4ft. It would not take much to familiarize oneself with the positions of the grip and their focal distances. More to figure out.
1. Complexity or an attempt to be all-singing, all-dancing. Sorry Contax G2!
2. Crop factor. Sorry M8 and Epson. Did the APS-C thing and not going back again. Panasonic and Olympus are at least creating lenses for the sensor but both suffer from point #3.
3. No viewfinder
The Zeiss Ikon is a nice alternative to an M6 or M7 and should be considered. But in the end, I want the M9 because it's the way forward, until somebody else does a FFRF.
Could I actually divest myself of the DSLR to fund this desire? I think I would seriously regret it. When I think of all I would miss it doesn't appeal so much. Macro lenses. Telephoto lenses. Wireless flash. Remote triggering (something I do enough to make it a loss). Today's DSLRs are an incredible value for money. Still, I think the RF could cover 80% of the photography I do so it pushes me to consider it, late at night when I should be asleep.
I said you would have trouble handing it back
Welcome to the RF world
Thanks for a great couple posts - really good info/analysis here for anyone who enjoys this kind of gear and shooting.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Made some hacking program to steal a fraction of a penny from everyone's bank account.
www.tednghiem.com
I have an old Leica, unused for years. You may have inspired me to get it out and play with it if I get bored with my GF1.
ditto!
It's not scarcity related either as there's a plentiful supply of all products.
I bought a complete Rollei 6002 kit on Ebay 18 months ago. Mint condition, charger, 4 spare batteries, prism finder, 50, 80 and 150 PQ lenses - total cost was $985. It was a steal.
Last week on Ebay a 6002 with just an 80mm HFT went for the same price!
Conclusion - film still rocks
I cannot say, from my time lurking amongst the rangefinderati that I have come to love film any more than I did. In some cases, it's breathtakingly beautiful in the right hands and eyes. There seems to be a pattern of me liking Portra 160VC quite a bit. Other times, it's like driving miles of hard road. Seeing a digital shot is sometimes soothing with its lack of grain and other filmic qualities that are less than ideal.
It makes a horse race.