"M" Reflections

Greetings again from Prague...

 

I guess by comparison I am relatively new or at least not very active

on these forums (especially Leica). But I have had some rare time

over the holidays to relax a bit and enjoy alot of what many people

here are saying, and have appreciated the repsonse to my queries. One

thing I have found interesting is the Mystique and interest that

these little German Tanks have rustled up over the years. Its odd, I

have been using M's for some 25 odd years...not excusivley...but

certainly a sizable chunk of my work, and I still have a love hate

relationship with them, although I suppose you could say I've pretty

much settled in with them and their dogmatic design. A couple of

years back while working on the set of Fox's feature film "From

Hell", I got into a rather lively debate with my friend Antonin

Kratochvil, who was here shooting a feature on Johnny Depp for NY

Times Mag. He really kept needling me about the M4-2 I had over my

shoulder and why I would chose to use such a limited tool...Antonin

has a real bug up his _ _ _ about rangefinders but he had a point, in

fact he had many. Indeed many of his criticisms I shared but have

learned to live with in return for certain benefits...what

benefits?.. Well of course I went through all the usual pro

rangefinder arguments ( many discussed on this forum)and he just

wasnt convinced and frankly neither was I, until it finally clicked

why I have doggedly stuck with my M's for all this time...the single

most important reason I have stuck with them. It was clear...I hate

gear, I hate anything unweildy (which doesnt take much for me).

Essentially I have a challenged work ethic, and on the days when I

wake up and just cant bear the thought of tramping around for hours

humping a camera bag of gear around, there is relief in the ease of

having an M and the two lenses I use the most (24mm and 75mm)on my

person on literally a daily basis...in many ways it has kept me at my

work because its no more trouble to carry around than a half a

pastrami sandwich and a recent volume of Granta. In this fashion the

M has saved me from myself, it is the most simple decision I make

every day. Hearing this, Antonin grinned behind that fat Cohiba

permanantly stuck in his gob, and said "Now that's an answer I can

live with".

 

Good Shooting,

 

Larry D. Horricks

Prague, Czech Republic

BTW... I didnt mean to give the impression that Antonin is a gadget freak, in fact its the opposite. He uses Nikon FM's with (almost exclusivley)28mm's. His main beef with Rangefinders are the .7m minimum focusing distance and the innability to see lens perspective, especially converging lines...these are my main beefs as well. In a recent interview with Bruce Gilden, he also stated he would love to have the advantages of M cameras, but the these two factors alone keep him shooting with SLR's...look at his work and you'll see why.

 

I never know what to do with my time off...

 

Larry

Hi Larry: I truly enjoyed reading your thoughts and comments re Leica , etc. Thanks for sharing. Happy New Year./ Bill

Larry: I hadn't thought about it in exactly those terms, but I'm with you. I hate gear, too. I signed up for a scuba class years ago, quit at the end of the first lesson and went back to my fins and snorkel for the same reason. All that crap strapped on made me claustrophobic and negated the feeling of freedom that attracted me to snorkeling to begin with.

 

Even my M bag was starting to seem too much a burden a few weeks ago, but while at the dealer I handled an R8 for a few minutes. The M is an Olympus Stylus in comparison.

For me is the perspective and converging line issues. I shot with a Nikkor

24mm for 6 years and then a 28mm along side a 50mm before going with

rangefinders. If I didn't have that experience I wouldn't know what the images

would look like by looking into the the Leica finders with the equivalent

Elmarits.

<i>His main beef with Rangefinders are the .7m minimum focusing distance and the innability to see lens perspective, especially converging lines...</i>

<p>

These are the exact reasons that ended my brief affair with rangefinders. I settled on the FM3a, which is as "Leica-Like" as you'll get in the slr world.

<p>

Had a recent, great trip to <a href="http://www.jimtardio.com/prague.html">Prague</a>...hoist a few Pivos for me.

I don't know, but I'm sure to get flamed for this response...

It's a nice side benefit that the Leica is small so maybe I might carry it on

days my arms feel like cooked pasta. But I carry a 8 pounder around for

10 straight hours at non stop weddings and still get the pictures.

 

As far as not seeing the lens effect...for me that is exactly the reason I use

a rangefinder. To me, rangefinder cameras help lessen or eliminate the

spectacular "design" aspect of photography in favor of seeing real

content. Not that that can't be achieved with any camera, it's just that

there are less distractions to that sort of seeing with cameras like a M.

I think most of us get used to the parralax issue with enough experience. With a top mounted finder you just move the camera straight up a couple inches and the film pretty much gets to see what you just saw. But more to the point, you just get so used to it that it becomes a non-issue, no different than fitting your composition to what the film will see as opposed to what the undersized framelines frame.

 

As for the undersized frameline issue, experienced photogs examine their negatives, look at contact sheets, often use a loupe on uncut rolls of 'chromes on a light table. The average person sees their 'chromes in slide mounts, and judges their prints by what part of the image the one hour lab decided to get on 4"x6" paper. If the frame lines were truly accurate there'd be a lot of cut off heads, amongst other things.

Flamed,well done,meduim or rare. I prefer mine just to be shown the heat. FM3A,great camera. However,after the Nikon slap,it sort of ruins the moment. Look everyone! there's a bloke taking photos.

"...and he just wasnt convinced and frankly neither was I..."

 

Sometimes you don't know what you believe until you hear its opposite.

 

"Essentially I have a challenged work ethic..."

 

I hear you...

 

Thanks for the note from Prague. One of the great places on the earth.

Interesting post Larry, and for me a valid topic. I dumped my Canon EOS system for Leica M in part because I stopped shooting pictures full time and no longer needed it. I loved the size of the M and was drawn to "the Leica Mystique" as well. After using M's for a couple of years my main gripe is exactly what Kratochvil described. I really dislike the fact the M's are relegated to .7 meters and have found the M wide angels, 21 & 24, not practical because of it. IMHO the lenses best suited for the system are the 35mm & 50., the others seem better suited for the SLR. Now that the honeymoon is over I can see the good and the bad but mostly M's function fine for what I like to shoot. Maybe you put it better, You learn to live with the negatives.

 

Thanks,

Tom

I dumped all my Nikon N90S equipment some time ago (to include the 12 AA batteries to run it and the SB-26 flash, and the five pound 35-70 D zoom lens), and jumped head first into Leica M and CL bodies. No regrets since, and better photos as well Why? Because I wanted to return to basics with manual focusing and exposure settings, for one thing, and this has forced me to slow down and think about what I'm composing, how I focused or determined the exposure, and so forth. My analogy is that shooting with a rangefinder like the Leica M6 is like slowing sipping a fine, expensive wine, or in the case of fishing for trout along a mountain stream, using a fly rod. The auto-everything approach to photography for me was like catching those fish in a net, or chugging cheap wine by the barrel. No thanks. I'm much happier taking my time with the Leica gear.

 

PS I also own the Leica R7 and R8 and love them as well.

Dobry Rano,

 

<Marc>

dont know why you would get "flamed" (I liked that term)for your comment...Anyway I assure you I understand what humping gear is all about. Even though I'd love to just wander the world with my Leicas communicating my own personal take on life and getting paid WELL for it...its just not reality for me...so I spend 4 to 6 months a year with two F4s,and a small assortment of lenses stuffed inside two suitcase-like Jacobson blimps (neccessary for silent shooting on set,not even the quiet Leica can cut it in this scenario so I use them for B&W behind the scenes stuff)) fighting for my place on the set so I can get images that few seem to appreciate compared to the busloads of "Hollywood Sh--head" grief I get trying to get them...but clearly I could do much worse, and have few legitmate complaints. It's well paid work and I've traveled this little planet, working with some very interesting and creative people...but its no picnic. I am sure many of you here are in the same boat, when it comes to balancing the work you love and work that supports your lifestyle or the kids college expenses etc.

 

<Jim/Tom>

I was in my local shop here the other day and caught a glance at the FM3...didnt know it existed...it does look interesting...and I have often thought that a better package for doing my B&W Documentary work would be My M6 with the 75 and 50 and an FM or even older F2 with a 28mm and 24mm...probably wouldnt take up too much more space in my life either.

 

<Tom>

 

The wider M series lenses are not ideal for me either because of the limitiations with focusing distance but I'm phobic about complicating things in my life so I've stuck with the M's for the bulk of my B&W Docu. work, I am however, slowly leaning toward getting a used FM or F2 and a 24 or 28 to satisfy certain compositional needs I cant get with My M's, it seems like not a bad compromise...and maybe a downright good idea.

 

<Al>

 

I know what your saying, you use someting long enough and work a certainway long enough and and it all finds a way of working out, but I honestly have never truly 100% been comfortable with Parallax. Before switching "full-time" to stills, I made my living for 15 years as a Motion Picture camera operator. My still photographic approach and style is still somewhat cinematic in nature and at times I struggle just a little with Parallax. Obviously I've made the adjustments and work comfortably (to a point) with the Rangefinder...but only to a point. I've made a living my whole life with my eye at one eyepiece or another...compositional skills have been and still are my mealticket, but I still am not and not likely ever to be 100% satisfied with everything Rangefinders have to offer...but like I said certain other factors and benefits have made them my primary choice for my documantary work. My M's have been honest, hard working, well built tools that I have been able to rely on for years...and that counts for alot in my books, as i'm sure it does in yours.

 

All for now,

 

 

Oh and Jim..."Imagine all the Pivo" ... now imageine singing this to the tune of John Lennon's "Imagine". Some mates and I made a up a version of John Lennon's classic all about debauchery in Prague.

 

Zatim ahoj...hodne zdravi... vsechno nejlepsi a doufam tento rok bude spoustu radoste a silenost.

 

Larry.

<<His main beef with Rangefinders are the .7m minimum focusing distance>>

 

With ultrawides, stopped down you can actually shoot much closer than .7m.

 

<<and the innability to see lens perspective, especially converging lines...these are my main beefs as well>>

 

That's why I always use the 28mm accessory finder rather than the one in the camera, and why I don't see a need for the 0.58 finder.

<Jay>

Curious, I use my 24mm more than any Leica lens I have, and I havent found I can be sharp much inside what the specs are...a little maybe but not significantly...not to the point of creating as interesting (sharp)foreground as I could with an SLR...I have come quite used to working with the Brightline finder for my 24mm and actually dont have too many complants with it from a compositional standpoint, but its still a bit of a funky way to work. Although I have certain beefs about working with rangefinders, obviously they're not weighty enough to force me to make sweeping changes in my gear...and like I said before the advantages for me for the most part outwiegh the annoyances. I do however,understand perfectly those who find the very concept of Rangefinders baffleing. Its interesting how Leica M cameras form these camps of people whom either have nothing but venomous contempt for them or are over the top in blind defense of them. I guess its the same with alot of things.

 

Larry.

I gave up smoking as a new year's resolution and this was a hard holiday for me. Being far from home (my choice though) kind of caught up with me. When I read about the pastrami sandwich and volume of Granta, I got overly nostalgic but I'm okay now. I've got a little Xmas money that I want to treat myself with, choices choices. Used M body? Nikon FM3a (honestly, I was considering this before it was mentioned, as well as Contax Aria) or digital or Film scanner. I guess its time to move to Europe. (Been planning it for awhile, look for Sept. launch.