Some Leica Legends Are Myths?

[peter_hughes1]

When the Leica M-series was new, in the early 1950's, it <i>was</i>

the fastest focusing camera around. Autofocus has changed all that. I

have no doubt that my $450 Elan 7 can focus much faster and with more

accuracy than my $2000 M6 TTL. But for the type of photography I do,

it doesn't matter.<p>If I was a working photojournalist, I would

carry both an EOS and a Leica M. I would use the former with a zoom

lens when the action was fast, the latter when I could spend more

time and wanted the magical quality that the Leitz glass has to

offer.<p>Bottom line: Use the right tool for the job.

[richie chishty]

Jay:

 

<p>

 

Is it possible that your M6 shutter needs to be serviced? Could that

be the reason for the loud "klop" that turned a few heads? My M6

TTL's shutter is louder than my M3 SS from 1961, which itself is

louder than my M3 DS from 1955. I don't know whether it is due to

age or different metals, but the M3 DS shutter is almost silent in

operation............

[andy_piper2]

Jay:

 

<p>

 

1) Ignor Jacques. Don't forget this thread <a href="http://

www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=006Oh0">from

after 9/11.</a> We luv ya, big guy.

 

<p>

 

2) Leica noise. The M is the quietest interchangeable lens 35mm camera.

Leaf shutter Rolleis, Ikontas, and Mamiya 6/7s will beat it, but no 35

or 6x4/6/7/9 SLR will. Try the 1/50th sync speed setting - it's the

quietest for some reason. Also see the "Leica Sighting" thread 6 items

down.

 

<p>

 

3) Leica focusing. RFs are faster for STATIC subjects in any light,

because the focusing is binary yes/no (do the images line up or don't

they?) With an SLR you're in a continuum ("Is it sharp? Could it be

sharper? Whoops, it went fuzzy again. Back up.")

 

<p>

 

RFs are also definitely easier/faster/more accurate (but not

necessarily all three at once) in low light WITH WIDE/NORMAL lenses.

I've shot dance-floor action very successfully with an RF (Canon P -

I'm looking for the negatives) - 50mm lens at f/4 plus flash (it was

REALLY dark) and using trap focus. With a 90 you may be stretching the

envelope.

 

<p>

 

RFs cannot follow-focus at all - follow-focusing is the quintessential

'continuum' focusing situation, totally alien to the binary RF image.

TRAP FOCUS is the ONLY way to handle fast-moving action with a

rangefinder, but often actually works even BETTER than AF or follow-

focus with an SLR, because you're redefining the paradigm so that it's

about TIME (the best MOMENT to fire, and the forte of the Leica quick-

fire shutter) rather than SPACE (the best PLACE to focus).

 

<p>

 

Decide the best framing for the kind of action you're shooting. Find a

substitute subject at the right distance to get that framing (floor,

steps, grass, whatever) and focus on it. Then use the viewfinder to

follow the action WITHOUT REFOCUSING and shoot when the action and

distance come together. Voila. The RF is BUILT for this kind of

photography - your subject stays nice and clear in the RF window

regardless of whether it's 'in focus' or not, and the shutter fires

RIGHT NOW when you hit the right moment/spot.

.

 

<p>

 

<center>

<img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=399417&

size=lg" width=330 height=504>

</center>

 

<p>

 

.

 

<p>

 

In fact trap-focus action photography can get as addictive as gun-

hunting (but without the dead bodies). Try it next time with the

dancers/kids/pets/whatever before sinking into the black pit of an SLR

viewfinder. 8^).

 

<p>

 

Re: infrared autofocus. Yeah, My (late) G2 could focus in a totally

black room or facing a blank wall. WHERE it would focus was a different

question ;^)

 

<p>

 

Cheers

[andy_piper2]

Addendums:

 

<p>

 

"The RF is BUILT for this kind of photography..." I should add that

trap-focus shooting is also the one time when I really USE the "space

outside the frame lines" to keep track of what's coming up as I pan

around following the action.

 

<p>

 

Tech details on picture: M4-2, 90 TE (thin), Pan F, 1/1000 @ f/4.

Focused on part of steps below where 'boarders seemed to hit their high

point. Panned with action. Shot.

[john_collier5]

In complete silence it is the sound not the volume that attracts

people's attention. A dropping pin will do it just as well as

breaking glass. I did some photos at a wedding this summer

with a couple of M cameras and a 90 amougst other lenses. I

had no problems but did use the above "trap" focus method. I

may be wrong but I think an AF lens (long focus and f/2 at least)

wide open in low light would give just as much trouble. At this

wedding someone was using an SLR and darned if my M wasn't

just as noisy as the SLR. I then realised that the M was next to

my ear and the SLR was almost 80 feet away :-).

 

<p>

 

After I have fired off a few frames with my M I often get asked to

hurry up and take the picture. When I fire my SL2, I get no such

questions.

 

<p>

 

I enjoy reading Jay's responses and questions. I have always

found him helpful and polite. I do not always agree with him but

then my wife assures me I am always wrong. So there!

 

<p>

 

Cheers,

[andrew_schank]

My M3 DS also seemed noticeably quieter than the M6 I played with.

I'm curious about this, anyone else notice the M3DS to be quieter

than the newer cameras, and if so, what would be the reason for it be?

[gerald4]

Jay,

 

<p>

 

In addition to being quite and ease of focus in low light, another key

strength of M photography is the fact that one not only sees what's in

the frame but subject matters outside of the frame as well. I think we

all know that the M photography is very different from that of SLR,

the key is to choose the right tool for the job and the decision is a

personal one. For the type of application that you mentioned (at a

wedding with fast moving subjects), I would stick with the 50 cron (or

35 cron if you prefer the wider view), zone-focus first then move your

body along with the subject while maintaining the zone distance

between you and the subject. Remember to always keep your M at the

eye-level readying for the next shot (this minimizes distractions as

well). Do that with the 90mm will be harder as its DOF is narrower

(unless using small apertures and fast film). The bottom line, there

is no ideal camera, with a lot of practice the application that you

mentioned can be done with the M. For some, it is what the M is made

for.

[msitaraman]

"Hm, what's that man doing here with his camera? Some people, they

carry their hobbies to the most inappropriate venues! Can't he just

sit back and enjoy the performance? Uh, oh, he's lifting it up, I

swear he's going to...CLICK. I wonder if he's going to do it again...

[tension rises] CLICK."

 

<p>

 

:-)

 

<p>

 

Its not so much that the Leica is loud (it is louder than a

Rolleiflex TLR or a Mamiya 7) but that people tend to be attracted by

the presence of cameras, especially amateur cameras, so their clicks

attract attention. Even if in relative terms, the click of a Leica

shutter is far quieter than the creaks and clicks of a man shifting

about on a folding chair in a theater, or of women walking by in the

aisle on high heels. Or the amplified music or sound coming from the

stage.

 

<p>

 

Had you been the professional on the spot (the guy with the

unbelievably noisy Hassy ELM), the sounds you would have made going

about doing your work would have not attracted anybody's attention or

disturbed most.

 

<p>

 

So, the moral is, its really not worth worrying about. Even a quieter

camera is going to attract just as much attention, or cause as much

annoyance as your Leica M6. And you are going to be just as self

conscious. So I guess its really up to you.

 

<p>

 

BTW, I do think that the N80 is about the quietest SLR around,

because the soft clop sort of sound it makesAnd as for

 

<p>

 

"Zone focusing a 90 at short distances at f/4 is not an option"- you

bet. Motorized SLRS do many things very well, quite a few tasks

better than a Leica M. Use them when they will get the job done.

[steve_belden]

Hi Jay,

 

<p>

 

I am from the M is a great camera for weddings camp. And lots of

practice was what I needed to get good shots in the low light and

active situations. It was extreamly frustrating at first since I was

missing shots I knew I could get with an SLR. So get back up on the

horse, Take your M6 to some challenging situations and shoot lots of

film. You soon will be getting the results your looking for. Forget

you even have an SLR.

 

<p>

 

And by the way, that thing about becomming invisible and

inaudible when using an M is pure myth.

 

<p>

 

Regards and keep posting

Steve

[jacques_balthazar]

I was not attacking Jay-the-person, and I apologise to him and others

if this was understood as a "hurtful slap on the face".

 

<p>

 

I was hitting at Jay-the-poster: how can one go on posting advices to

others all over the place when one does not have the personal

experience substantiating such advices ?

 

<p>

 

9/11 has nothing to do with this discussion.

[russell_brooks]

Yes, the key to the M is not how quiet it is. (And it is pretty quiet

although my friend's M6 TTL is much more quiet than my newly revised

M2 from Leica!). The key is the unobtrusiveness. I had a Mamyia 7 and

it was slient. But I sold it because everytime I pulled it out

everybody around me went "woooo a professional". And that's not the

effect I am going for.

[nesrani]

"Come on everyone, let's be honest - would we all love, preach and

treasure our Leicas' if they were not called "Leica" and didn't come

with all the history that is tied up in the whole "Leica" mystique. "

 

<p>

 

Well, I'll be honest about it! I like my rangefinders because they

are the only cameras with which I can guarantee to get the subject in

focus in very low light. They're not ideal for following moving

subjects in those conditions perhaps, and I have yet to use modern

AF, but for my work they're ideal and I virtually never have out of

focus shots.

 

<p>

 

I also shoot the occasional wedding and find them ideal for that as

well.

 

<p>

 

I really don't care about whether thay have Konica or Leica written

on them, in fact if the Hexar RF had been available when I got my M's

I would certainly have got that instead.

[ron gregorio]

I've shot action shots with my M2 & Summicron 50/2 under available

light, no flash. The setting was a stage show and people were moving

around. I'd wait for them to pose or stop moving then shoot. It's

also pretty quiet. No metering was done. All I know is that at that

available light, I'd shoot with a 400 film at f/2.8 and at 1/15th of

a second. Focusing was hard but I'd point the focusing box on the

subject's outline at a predictable spot, where the subject would be

standing. It takes a while to get used to it, but the key is to

think ahead by knowing the exposure, prefocusing, and timing the shot.

[michael_kastner]

The legend for me is that Ms are great because they are so timeless

and mechanically perfect. All that in this day and age of electronical

wonders! The myth is that they are great <i>although</i> so old and

mechanical. Or is it the other way around?

[david_kelly1]

Jay: I don't want to let this thread go to the archive without adding

my thanks to the chorus - I've benefited hugely from the vast

expertise of your posts, delivered always with good-humored patience

and unfailing courtesy. Glad you're arou

[david_kelly1]

.....around!........./....

[ray_moth]

Jay: I agree with David Kelly. I've learned a lot from you about both

M and R. Thanks for your valuable contributions to this forum and to

the Leica Reflex Forum.

[msitaraman]

Jay has been extremely helpful with pertinent, meaningful advice and

informational posts that have many in this community, including

myself. The least we can do is to repay him in part by helping him

with a technique issue-the worst one can do is to mock him for a lack

of technical skills in response to a good faith inquiry.

 

<p>

 

So, Jacques, I'm not sure exactly what you mean... Should anyone who

has previously given to this forum, refrain from asking any

questions, or otherwise avoid displaying any gaps in their knowledge,

the better to avoid personal mockery? Or are you saying that until we

have all the answers to all matters, we should not dare post any

advice? Or that there is something terribly wrong about passing on

received knowledge, which of course, is precisely the point of a

database forum?

 

<p>

 

Exactly how will these cooperative forums work if we proceed with

guidelines so stifling?

 

<p>

 

Loosen up, Jacques :-D

 

<p>

 

This is a hobby forum, and a successful happy one at that! It does

not work too well when we start getting critical about individual

members when no misconduct is involved.

[jacques_balthazar1]

I sense some self dilusion here. It is NOT by pasting rehashed

LUG/Puts/media clichés under the guise of personal experience (using

sentences starting by "I") in tons of mails posted on various mailing

lists and web sites every day that anyone can provide "valuable

contributions".

 

<p>

 

Questions, basic or complex, on the contrary, ARE usually "valuable

contributions".

 

<p>

 

And the questions heading this thread are perfectly valid

questions...coming from someone who might have bought a M a couple of

weeks/months ago or used one by accident during the week-end. These

are questions that certainly deserve to be addressed and argued.

 

<p>

 

But these are questions that CANNOT possibly come from someone who is

simultaneously serving the world and beyond with megabytes

of "pertinent, meaningful" advice on the M and R systems and on

photography in general.

 

<p>

 

Either you know what you are constantly writing about, and you will

have solved the questions above years ago, or you do not know what

you are writing about, and you should refrain from disseminating

pseudo-knowledge.

 

<p>

 

Answers based on first hand experience are "valuable contributions".

Refering others to named sources (articles, books)and/or older

quotes/mails/threads/sites is a "valuable contribution".

 

<p>

 

Come on, take a look at <a

href="http://www.topica.com/lists/leica_reflex_forum/read/message.html

?mid=1604482158"> this</a>.

 

<p>

 

Or <a href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?

msg_id=006z6D"> this</a> (scroll down) , or <a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?

msg_id=004mzT"> this</a> (scroll down).

 

<p>

 

Let us all be honest now: how can you state such highly impressive

things confidently and then ask the question that triggered this

thread ?

 

<p>

 

Of course stating this makes me sound as someone who is not nice, and

makes the subject of my flagging (or flogging) look like a victim.

 

<p>

 

Nevertheless, a fraud is a fraud. A nice, polite and civilised fraud

is still a fraud.

[tony_rowlett2]

J,

<p>

Um, call me dense, but I'm not getting your point. Not at all.

<p>

Maybe it has something to do with "knowing everything."

<p>

I'll say this: The first person who posts to this forum who really

does indeed "know everything" will be banished. Forever. I mean it.

<p>

I'm still referring you to Rule #1 in the <a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/policy.tcl?topic=Leica%20Photogr

aphy"><b>About</b></a> section of this forum. Calling someone a fraud

for no good reason is not nice. And in this particular case, after

having read the threads you've refered to, you are still dead wrong

about Jay.

[tony_rowlett2]

And a big, arrogant ass is still an ass. No?

[art_karr]

Andrew:

 

<p>

 

<b> My M3 DS also seemed noticeably quieter than the M6 I

played with. I'm curious about this, anyone else notice the M3DS

to be quieter than the newer cameras, and if so, what would be

the reason for it be? </b>

 

<p>

 

The answer is yes, even when the shutter was working. I don't

know why.

 

<p>

 

Tony:

 

<p>

 

<b> And a big, arrogant ass is still an ass. No?</b>

 

<p>

 

I am suprised that you would post my personal description.;o)

 

<p>

 

Art

[jay_.]

Thanks for the votes of confidence. The gentleman who considers me a

fraud somehow must have missed the numerous references throughout my

posts to the fact that my expertise, if I dare call it that, is in

landscape, scenic and wildlife photography, as well as the mechanics

of the Leica equipment. I have never made any claims to having much

experience--or luck--with "people photography". I'm humbled by all

the people here who have invested as much time and effort into that

area of specialty as I have invested in mine, and grateful that we

can share our collective experience.

[nesrani]

"The M is the only possible tool in church for any photographer

respecting the people he is photographing. The flashing 'blad pro is

producing at industrial scale the standard goods ordered by his

customer. The M person will be taking the real pics. the lively ones,

the interesting ones, the respectful ones."

 

<p>

 

I think this is one of the numerous Leica myths. I've seen

outstanding wedding albums produced by people using F5's with flash,

just as I've seen really appalling "photojournalist" wedding albums

produced by Leica users. Wedding photography is a very specialised

domain and the kind of camera used has nothing to do with the quality

of the results. Just as in every other field of photography.

[simon_wong]

In response to Jacques' rather rude replys to Jay's question I say

this.

 

<p>

 

Jay has never claimed expertise in the field of

candid/lowlight/street/wedding photography.

 

<p>

 

His knowledge in technical matters in photography and in Leica

specifically has always been substantiated with on field practice.

 

<p>

 

He has always helped out others by being supportiveand informative,

even when they have fielded ridiculous questions.

 

<p>

 

A so called "fraud" would never allow even the slightest suggestion

of not knowing the answers to everything.....Jay's question was I

believe was a genuine request for advice to a forum of people he felt

comfortable enough to ask for help in matters he was struggling a

with.

 

<p>

 

Please offer a little curteousy to a gentleman who has never refused

to offer help to others around him.

 

<p>

 

In response to Jay. The situation you described....lowlight rapidly

moving subjects....is difficult for every camera setup. It is equally

fustrating for one to have autofocusing cameras (mine was EOS30) hunt

back and forth. However if it is only an occasional foray into

wedding style photography then I think ultimatedly your F80 with

flash infared assist reduced to only the central focus point would be

quicker and easier.

 

<p>

 

Noise wise.....people have a knack of just knowing that you have a

camera and are about to take their photograph. I'll bet if all you

did was raise your camera and pretend to take their photo, they would

still turn and look at you disapprovingly.

 

<p>

 

It's how you handle the stormly look that follows that creats the

photojournalist in you ;-)

 

<p>

 

I think how a lot of wedding photography succeeds is in the use of

flash photography with small aperatures and lots of depth of field.

 

<p>

 

After a while your begin to realise most photographs are a certain

distances with certain lenses, so you prefocus and just frame the

subject to fill the finder in the proportion you know is at the

correct distance. Then you just fireaway allowing the flash to freeze

movement and your depth of field at F8/11 to cover any errors.

 

<p>

 

Typical Leica M style available light photography shot wide open with

slow shutterspeeds.....is definitley an aquired art. Again

prefocusing and moving your body back and forth to keep you in the

Zone. Shoot lots and don't expect too many keepers! This is just a

matter of practice, practice, practice!

 

<p>

 

Cheers.

Simon