How do you 'max' your Leica?

How do you get the best out of your Leica? I am talking mainly about Leica M - which I

have the most experience with - although I'd like to hear from other Leica users, too. I

realize it depends how you use your images - email, postcard size pics, display prints,

slides for projection, or publication. For the sake of argument, let's define maximum

quality as a big display print or a DPS (double page spread) in a magazine.

 

Out of these variables, which do you think makes the most difference? Put simply, which

combination works best for you?

 

* Optics: Which is the best lens, eg, 24 asph, 35 asph, 50 'cron?

 

* Film: Which is best? For example, do you agree Fuji Astia 100F the fine grain king?

 

* Fast shutter speed to minimize camera shake (if it's blurred, you negate the benefits of

good lens and good film);

 

* Use of tripod if necessary in low light - advice on the best to use, or forget about it;

 

* Optimum focus;

 

* Optimum exposure (seems to make an enormous difference to final print quality,

especially if using slide film);

 

* Output: printing quality, scanning (lots of variables).

 

How does the end result, at this size, stack up against digital or MF equivalents?

"How do you get the best out of your Leica?"

 

I keep it simple and don't over-complicate things.

 

Michael J Hoffman

* Optics: Which is the best lens, eg, 24 asph, 35 asph, 50 'cron?

 

I like 35. I have 2/35ASPH because it is quite a lot cheaper than the 1.4.

 

* Film: Which is best? For example, do you agree Fuji Astia 100F the fine grain king?

 

I use almost only Kodak BW400CN in my M Leica. Occasionally Provia because I have piles of it for use on my XPan.

 

* Fast shutter speed to minimize camera shake (if it's blurred, you negate the benefits of good lens and good film);

 

Generally as fast as reasonable based on subject.

 

* Use of tripod if necessary in low light - advice on the best to use, or forget about it;

 

If necessary, but usually not. I have six tripods in different sizes and also Leitz table top and two monopods. Leica can do with smaller and lighter versions.

 

* Optimum focus;

 

Based entirely on subject distance.

 

* Optimum exposure (seems to make an enormous difference to final print quality, especially if using slide film);

 

Based mainly on light meter in M6.

 

* Output: printing quality, scanning (lots of variables).

 

Proof prints from lab that processes C-41. Scan with Minolta Multi Pro. Print currently mostly with Epson 2100. Soon upgrading to a bigger printer, not yet decided.

 

MF is better. LF better still. But you can't do that at F/2 handheld.

I don't generally worry to much about "max"ing the technical aspects of my Leica images--I shoot with whatever film, lens, and technique are needed to get the shot and look I want. In terms of small grain and apparent sharpness in large prints, my Canon 5D, 4x5, and medium-format cameras all provide better results than my Leicas.

The best thing to do with your Leica is not to baby it. Don't worry about scratching it and just use it rough like you would with an FM2.

I came to the conclusion that older lenses and plus x (d76)give me what I'm looking for.This results in an M6 with super angulon 21mm 3.4, first version summicron 35,summicron 50mm '69,first elmarit 90mm and cl and cle with 40mm summicron.

I don't max my Leica, I just <i>use</i> it. I use whatever film there is in it or I already have in my bag, or can or will buy tomorrow. If I bum up a lot of shots, it's not the film's fault. Exactly the same for lenses. I still don't even know which of my 2/40C, 2/35A and 2/50P is max! I can't max my Leica. I don't think <i>anybody</i> can max their Leica.

Mmmmm, Plus X and D76...

JJ

Mike Dixon said it best. Besides the choice of film, the most important element to improve images for enlargement is a tripod. Modern optics dating from the late 60s are good enough.

The short answer.......Kodachrome.

How about practicing shooting - ie developing your way of seeing and capturing what's

around you? Will no doubt have a much greater impact than any "Taking your Leica to the

Next Level" program.

My best lens is 35lux asph, its the only lens i have.

All of my shots with leica are less than optimum, but thats life.

A K&N air filter plus a 2.5" cat-back exhaust really opened 'er up. A chip kit removes the

rev-limiter and the top speed governer, too. Plus, I only use Mobil-1.

My guiding principle is picture first, max second.

<P>

* Optics: Which is the best lens, eg, 24 asph, 35 asph, 50 'cron?

<P>

I'll use whatever lens is readily available; for 'picture first' either the 400mm f/6.8 or 560mm f/6.8 is first choice; if I can get close enough I'll 'max' the picture with the 280 f/4 APO.

<P>

* Film: Which is best? For example, do you agree Fuji Astia 100F the fine grain king?

<P>

Color quality and limiting subject motion are more 'max' to me than fine grain. For 'picture first' I use Provia 400F; for 'max' I'll use the slowest film the subject's activity will allow. I wish I had been able to use more K25. My normal slow film is E100G.

<P>

* Fast shutter speed to minimize camera shake (if it's blurred, you negate the benefits of good lens and good film);

<P>

My standard rig includes a shoulder stock and monopod. Subject motion is a bigger concern than camera motion.

<P>

* Use of tripod if necessary in low light - advice on the best to use, or forget about it;

<P>

The shoulder stock/monopod rig suits my needs 99% of the time; the mobility it allows fits the 'picture first' principle and the stability it provides is good enough to where subject motion limits the 'max' potential.

<P>

* Optimum focus;

<P>

Focus on the near eye and either use enough DOF to cover the other important elements or get the important elements to line up in a plane:

<CENTER>

<IMG SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/strigidae/eeow02.jpg">

<BR>

<B>Eurasian Eagle Owl</B>, captive <BR>

</CENTER>

<P>

* Optimum exposure (seems to make an enormous difference to final print quality, especially if using slide film);

<P>

Use the SL's meter, don't blow out the highlights, get the shadow detail.

<P>

* Output: printing quality, scanning (lots of variables).

<P>

at this stage I've got the picture so I concentrate on 'max': 4000 dpi scan at home @ 16 bits/channel or drum scan, output to lab's Lightjet printer.

Use it for what it was functionally intend to do. So, I don't have lenses I can't frame in the

viewfinder, even though the 24/2.8 ASPH is a fabulous lens. I also don't have a 135/3.5

anymore either because the framing is so small.

 

It gets good use because it's a small kit that I can easily carry anywhere without much

trouble. I can put a M, second lens and 6 rolls of film + ND filters in a case that won't even

hold my 5D body. So the 5D stays, and the M goes with. Optically, it's there and then some.

That's all that counts.

Mike Dixon and Raymond Tai summed things up pretty good already. It's really just a very accurate and reliable tool. Tools should be chosen for the job at hand. The best "look" for a photo isn't just a matter of ultimate sharpness, and a lot of older glass designed years ago, like the 21/3.4 Super Angulon and the 85/2 Nikkor give me what I like. My 35 and 50mm Summicrons aren't the latest either.

 

When you start getting into larger print sizes the film grain starts to be the limiting factor with 35mm. You mention double page magazine layouts. I once shot the center spread for a fold-out record album cover - a 12x24 inch image from 35mm E2 process Ektachrome - using a cheap ($34.50 in the late 60's)Sterling Howard 400mm f/6.3 lens that I'd modified to fit my Visoflex II. The group, Fantasy, wanted a shot of themselves sitting cross legged on the beach with the rising sun in the background. Was it crispy-crunchy tack sharp? Hell no, not at that size. But they were happy, and the art director at Liberty/United Artists, their label, soon had me doing shoots of Ike & Tina Turner and some other groups when they were in Miami.

 

With Kodachrome just a memory and the closing of most all the 2 hour E-6 labs color has largely become digital even if you're shooting color negative. Slides meant getting the exposure right and the correct filtration, before you pushed the button. From that point, from the art director to the color seperation folks to the press people, the idea was to stay as true as possible to what was on that transparency. Now everybody seems to want to fiddle with it, change it, "improve" it.

 

I think that in today's world the Leica is really best for what it was originally used for, quick hand held largely instinctive shooting using black and white film. Get to know your camera to the point where you don't have to think when you raise it to your eye. Focussing and setting exposure should be automatic because your brain and hands are the automation. Know what your lenses cover so when the camera comes to your eye you're the correct distance from the subject to frame with that lens.

 

As for tripods, the little Leitz table-top is handy in very low light. You can brace it against your chest, put in on a table, an automobile hood (bonnet), a stone wall in the garden, or just press the legs against a wall, telephone pole, even a low ceiling. At the other extreme go BIG. I have a Gitzo Studex, the heavy metal one. Weight is stability. Hang your camera bag on the tripod when using it. The more weight the better. Try to get the height from extending the legs, not the center column, and extend the fat sections first.

 

Still, in the end, the M Leica is a hand camera best used for what it's best at doing, and those pictures gain their strength and impact from composition, lighting, and expressions, not ultimate sharpness.

Fuji Neopan 400

Al Katlin said: "With Kodachrome just a memory....."

 

Well in Canada it is a week or so from local drug store chain, Shoppers Drug Mart, and they are everywhere. The processing is somewhere in the southern U.S. Bought a few rolls last week and the price is $1:00/roll lower than last year.

 

So it isn't instantanious feedback.....but the waiting is the best part :)

For your own use that's fine, but clients like to get their photos sooner than a week. In the "good old days" Kodak had a guy that would make the rounds of the camera shops in the Miami area picking up and dropping off. First off in the morning he'd pick up the night's processing run from the Atlanta lab for deliveries. Late afternoon his day's pick-ups were on a flight to Atlanta. A lot of clients preferred Kodachrome enough that they'd put up with next day service instead of two hour E-6 with Ektachrome. But a week? That's a bit too long. I don't know what arrangements Kodak had with which airline but we always had our stuff next day.

Mike Dixon hit it on the head. Barnack did not develop the Leica to be a candid street camera, he developed it to replace large cameras since he was physically unable to cart them around (he was asthmatic). So his goal was to wring as much as possible out of a very small negative. Nowadays (and for the last few decades) there are medium and even large format cameras that are fairly light and portable, and plus now there's high-res digitals like the 5D to choose from.

Brilliant response, thanks, I shall have another thorough read. Just love that Eurasian owl!

Yes, of course, I agree aesthetics, composition are what make the shot. And some of my

favorite ones have been low-light handheld with an old 50 'cron wide open. Which makes

Leica ideal for travel and landscapes. But a shame not to get the very best technical results

from whatever outfit you are using. Thanks again.

Douglas: simple and sensible approach, I'm going to borrow some of your thoughts for my class.

What do you teach, Tony?

i can't imagine how treating a camera "rough" would in any way have anything to do with using a leica for it's intended purpose. yeah, a few scratches or dings won't hurt it, but a scratched camera won't take any better photographs than a mint one, and if you bang it around enough, eventually you are going to, at the least, knock the rangefinder out of alignment. i'm not a "fondler", but i have never understood this philosophy that romanticizes banging up your equipment.

Nevermind, Tony. I see from another thread that you teach photography...(D'uh!)

 

Where do you teach?