clgriffin

<p>Harold,<br> I spent a lot of money and survived a massive double pulmonary embolism to get that shot. I had been out morning and evening for 4 days, then was hit by my own camera so hard that it caused bleeds into my lungs. Thing was, I did not know what had gone wrong. I spent that night taking partial breaths. The next day had heavy rain so I rested and while my breath had come back I could not walk ten steps. But I got on the jeep the next day and got this tiger and another, plus a leopard and a nice croc shot in the one day. I finished my agenda and trip on schedule despite having very little energy and my wife made me go to the hospital to get the diagnosis after I returned home. In all I spent four days at the bird sanctuary at Bharatpur and seven at the tiger preserve at Ranthambore in Rajastan. Three days in New Delhi, three long rail journeys, one day in Mumbai, three days in the Nilgiri hills at a tea plantation, two days in Bangalore, One night going and two nights returning in Frankfurt, Germany. About $4500 overall, making my own arrangements with Ranthambore Bagh, an Indian hotel and travel agency.</p><div></div>

<p>Seeing the last comment, I have to put in my two cents. Unless the weather turns bad, you will be doing most of your shots in daylight. Using a higher shutter speed to match or exceed the focal length is imperative and lessens the need for stabilization. For late evening or very early morning at camp a tripod will do more for you, also.<br> <br />A beanbag that you can fill there, or a sack of rice will isolate the lens from vehicle vibrations. You will always need to use whatever support you can find to brace yourself and the equipment. You need two lenses, I prefer a camera for each as changing lenses in dust is not good.<br> A wide zoom. I used the 24-105 for my Canons in Kruger NP. And either a zoom like the 150-600, 50-500mm is even better. I got by with a 400mm DO and tele extenders, but I have gone to India with Sigma zooms with OS (150-500 on first trip and 50-500 on the last trip) and got many great shots.<br> <br />I personally used a monopod in open jeeps. I put the foot of the 'pod on my boot top to isolate it from the jeep's mechanical vibrations and braced myself against whatever I could use--the seat, the supports for the roof. Hold your camera and lens tightly to yourself when going off-road or on rough trails. I learned the hard way that a large lens and camera flying around can cause great harm.</p><div></div>

<p>Edward, the only thing the M EVF (or the exact same thing in Olympus brand, but cheaper) does is to use live view and focus magnification at eye level eliminating glare. It is nowhere near as fine as the Sony EVFs are, but useful in that one purpose.</p>

<p>Edward:<br />This is "coming soon" at B&H:</p> <h1 >DEO-Tech Golden Eagle Contax G Lens to Sony NEX Camera Lens Mount Adapter Mark III</h1>

<p>But the Leica M is still a superb tool.</p><div></div>

<p>How right you are. Fragile, hardly usable.</p><div></div>

<p>Well, a Leica M (type 240) might be the best answer. I love mine, but carry a Sony most frequently because of weight and versatility. If I were going into a war zone, you can't beat the top-of-the-line Canons, Nikons or M-mount Leicas for durability in hardship conditions.<br />But Sony a7 series cameras use all those brand lenses and far more via adapters. I recently shot some sports with a Sigma 120-300mm zoom, EF-mount, on a Sony a7rII and was very satisfied with the results.</p>

<p>Sony a7RII, Metabones IV, Sigma 120-300mm Sports at 300mm. 1/1000s @ f5, ISO 100. Saturday cross country race.</p><div></div>

<p>I've been quite pleased with the Voigtlander lenses on Sony cameras. This edited scene in Spain did not have a vignette problem or color issues on the edges with a Sony a7R and Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 Nokton lens. I did brighten the overall scene and may have added a bit of saturation.</p><div></div>

<p>I can't match what you guys are discussing. I've been satisfied by the choices available in the M (Type 240). I get good results using the film mode of Black and White with the subset of yellow filter and vintage tone. The edited version of this image with old burning and dodging techniques employed is on another thread here, but this is straight out of the camera, using a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton Classic single-coated lens. ISO 800, 1/60s @ f5.6.</p><div></div>

<p>I should have added: M (type 240), CV 40mm Nokton Classic f1.4 S.C. 1/60s at f5.6, ISO 800.</p>

<p>I can't speak to the M9. My last Leica was an M3 many years ago. But I have acquired a 240 precisely because I had been getting more and more into the Sony a7 cameras and have a growing collection of Voigtlander lenses along with one Zeiss LM lens. Why not try out the newer Leica and see if there is something worthwhile to it.<br> The M is a bit heavier and sometimes awkward to use, different than my memory of the M3, but that is with the shorter lenses, Getting my finger on the right spot to focus takes new practice for sure. The shutter is very good, quiet, comparable to the new Sony a7II in that regard. In single shot mode, my shooting style is cramped considerably. I hit the shutter button three times, at least, to get two shots. There is a lag regardless of Live View being on or not. On continuous it fires as fast as I would like to do manually, but runs out of operating memory quickly. Then there is the wait for the processing to finish. This Leica forces you to take time to think about stuff, maybe the exposure or the subject, possibly about your favorite football team's chance at the title this year. I'm thinking the M is better for artsy shots, possibly for street work, but not for sports or fast-moving or hazardous photojournalism.<br> For 35, 50 and 75mm lenses, the rangefinder is superb--dead on and fast. With wider, longer or specialty lenses, it is ideal to attach either Leica's accessory viewfinder or the Olympus VF-2. Neither provide anything as refined as the Sony viewfinders, but it does make it possible to see what's within the frame and to attempt magnified focus.<br> So, why keep it?<br> Well, it is a work of art to look at and feel. The software turns out a very nice image, especially if you code the lenses to match the Leica software expectations. Using a rangefinder gives me a slightly different window on the prospective image--harking back to my first days as a working news photographer. And anyone who worked with film does not feel restrained by lower ISOs than are expected of a Sony or Canon camera.</p> <div></div>

<p>The Leica M (240) is little larger in the hand than my old M3 was--and there are buttons here and there I find it easy to put my finger on without intending to do so.<br /> I probably should have picked up the Leica multifunctional grip, but for far less money I added the Really Right Stuff handgrip and QR base. It gives me something to grab onto when I have to use my left hand to adjust focus or aperture on a lens like the Voigtlander 12mm. The used Olympus VF-2 takes the place of an optical viewfinder for that lens and more.</p><div></div>

<p>Sony A7R with CV 35mm Nokton f1.2 at f5.6, 1/25s, ISO 2000. I did not have any problems with this lens on either this or the A7S camera.</p><div></div>

<p>It does not seem this way with all my Canon glass, but definitely with the Sigma 50-500mm OS I get a vignette and distortion of image at the edges, more from the 50mm end, but also visible at 500mm. I checked several just now and edges are just fine on other Sigma lenses and Zeiss lenses and Canon glass. It may be that this one lens has an optical geometry that is different than most of the rest of the glass. I don't have a Canon 24-70 II to test.</p>