E. Puts on the new Leica M lenses

[Tony Rowlett]

Chris and Pete: This forum's reputation of spewing crud toward Mr. Puts is HORRIBLE and goes back for years. I just don't get it. Never have gotten it. Never will get it. Don't appreciate it. Irritates the crap out of me (and others, certainly). If I were to delete every post that said something stupid or mean to the man, there'd be maybe twelve messages left.

[derek_stanton2]

Writing in a "foreign language" may not be easy. But, Puts publishes in English, so by what other standard should he be

judged? I also can't excuse him for lack of "nuance," as he seems to have no problems with that when discussing

quantitative matters.

 

He's fine for reading technical 'information.' Where he derails is with regard to anything qualitative. It's kinda like the guy

wearing Dockers writing a fashion blog. All of those words should just be ignored.

 

"What I do not think he illustrated in this article, but has talked about extensively over time in other articles is the difference in

photographic technique between an DSLR and a rangefinder."

 

There are no inherent differences in photographic technique between a DSLR and a rangefinder. If the user chooses to use

one differently, that's a simple choice and has nothing to do with the gear. You can use a 5D or D3 in full manual mode, with

or without metering. With or without AF. The same way as you'd use an M3 or an M6 or an M7 or M8. I use my Ikon (and

previously M7) the same way i used my 5D or F100 or EOS 3 or R7.

 

Puts also seems to believe a Formula One driver relies on technology to drive the car for him.... I guess if a D3 takes the

picture for the photographer, sure, an F1 car decides when to brake and steer. Quelle idiot.

[Robin Smith]

I agree with you Tony. Why people waste their time going on about Erwin Puts is a total mystery to me. He is a lot

better than many bloggers as far as I can see. He also heaped praise on the D3 too - so what's the problem? He

basically said the philosophy behind the camera and the type of people who actually use them is different, which is

pretty well what every Leica M user says on this site every day of the year. The site is full of "manual photography is

best" and "rangefinder viewing is a different philosophy," and decrying "tunnel vision SLRs" and so on. So I think,

quite honestly, he is indeed essentially correct even if the Formula 1 analogy is not a good one.

 

Also all this stuff about assuming Puts only has Leica's is nonsense - he uses both Canons and Nikons too.

[el_fang]

<i>Chris and Pete: This forum's reputation of spewing crud toward Mr. Puts is HORRIBLE and goes back for years. I

just don't get it. Never have gotten it. Never will get it. Don't appreciate it. Irritates the crap out of me

(and others, certainly). If I were to delete every post that said something stupid or mean to the man, there'd be

maybe twelve messages left.</i>

<p>The only person saying anything stupid is Erwin Puts himself. Or do you agree with him that <b>"when you see

an excellent Nikon picture, the camera takes the credit for 75%, where in the case of the Leica the user takes

90% of the credits"</b>? Because if you don't, then tell him to stop posting that crap on his own site. Censoring

it here doesn't eliminate the source of the problem.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

Since a Leica LTM or M has a short flange to film plane distance;and no slr mirror to deal with a 24,28 0 or 35mm lens doesnt have to be a retrofocus design like a 35mm slr.. If one has a 24x36mm sensor/film and a 16mm retro focus slr lens; the light hits the sensor/film "more perpendicular" that a non retro focus 16mm lens. If you were a "observer" ie a little man on the film or sensor corner; the light is more like an overhead sun compared to a sunset with the non retro lenses.:) Its an issue of geometry; not just the flange distance. One could make a 1/2 scale canon 5d and it would still work well with wideangle lenses. i

[el_fang]

<i>Oh lord, what a load of rubbish. I still can't believe how many people buy into this kind of double talk. He's

the Ken Rockwell of Leica Photography.</i>

<p>Watch it there bud - that's an insult to Ken Rockwell :) At least Rockwell <a

href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm" target="_blank">admits that much of what he writes is not to be taken

seriously</a>.</p>

<p><i>By E. Puts' logic, the successful user of the Holga should be the proudest of his accomplishment! Or, maybe

the pinhole camera?</i></p>

<p>Nope, it's the Neanderthal "keepin' it real" with a charcoal stick and a cave wall.</p>

[el_fang]

<a href="http://tv.mediaprovider.se/?id=1223561589701" target="_blank">Maike Harberts of Leica AG</a> has said

(at 5:21 in the video) that Leica wishes the R10 to be a "modern" camera and that it will have autofocus.

Presumably, "modern" also means it will have the usual automatic modes.

<p>I'd like to see if Erwin Puts has the guts to write the following after the release of the R10:</p>

 

<P><i>"The <b>R10</b> scores with speed and dynamic automation, the <b>M8</b> needs skill and dedication. But

when you see an excellent <b>R10</b> picture, the camera takes the credit for 75%, where in the case of the

<b>M8</b> the user takes 90% of the credits. When using the <b>M8</b>, you use the bare essentials of the

photographic process and your own skills to get the picture. The <b>R10</b> is a most flexible instrument to get

the job done, but you are more removed from your own skills and thus the pride of accomplishment is less.</i>

(Bold edits mine)</p>

<p>I'm taking bets. Will he actually say this about the "modern" R10? Or will he backpedal his way past <a

href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Gordon" target"_blank">Steve Gordon</a> into the Guinness Book of World

Records? Stay tuned!</p>

[el_fang]

And by the way, and this is for the record (assuming it doesn't get deleted), if Erwin Puts actually writes that, I will never, EVER criticize him again.

[aplumpton]

I am sure that for the 10 or 20 "experts" in Photo.Net who consistently and dogmatically claim Puts' reviews are

nonsense, there are several orders of magnitude more readers who are very glad he offers his tests and his insights, who respect his

considered views and who are convinced of both his sincerity and (in most cases) accuracy of reviewing. He may twist a few

words in English occasionally (try to speak his Dutch maternal language and do as well...!) but who cares? Anyone who

has read his in-depth articles and informative tests and reviews of the complete line of Leica rangefinder and other lenses

can only ignore the quality of his reviews if he or she is driven by some sort of a hate complex. To the latter, do yourselves a favour and

read over his dozens of serious tests/reviews.

 

Erwin is one of the bright chroniquers on the photographic scene. Reading one of his reviews is worth putting up with all the

rubbish we hear here, every time he freely offers another well-researched review. If his critics cannot provide equally weel-researched tests

and reviews, I would humbly suggest that they might be best to "put up or shut up".

[joseph_wisniewski]

R Jackson - "Does anyone here ever use their DSLR in manual mode? With CW metering? Spot meter? Dial in exposure compensation?"

 

Actually, I do, quite frequently. Another argument for the D3: the controls have radically superior ergonomics. The M8, although it has an electronically controlled shutter, places its shutter control where the manual setting shaft exited a mechanical shutter, instead of somewhere more ergonomically advantageous. Likewise the aperture collar. The D3 is sort of like that race car Christiaan Phleger mentions earlier in the thread, the important shifter controls moved to fingertip access.

 

As James Symington put it "Just because you can make a D3 do everything for you doesn't mean you do". If you don't use its automated features, it's a superior manual camera to a Leica (although it should probably be compared to an R or S, rather than M). And if you need the automation, it's there, and of the highest quality.

 

(And to clarify, these are not idle claims: I've had decades of user interface design experience, know how to measure strike zones, use both a surface and sub cutaneous EMG, run ergonomic simulation software, and design assistive technology for challenged or injured photographers and musicians. I can recognize a poor user interface as quickly as an experience Leica shooter can recognize a lack of microcontrast).

[stephen_pitts]

Arthur,

 

I wholeheartedly agree with your comments and find some of the diatribes against him here rather sad, comical or

pathetic.

 

His blog from photokina is also interesting on how automated cameras have become from the goal that was first set

almost four decades ago. If you think about it, this automation (exposure and autofocus being the big ones) has

certainly improved the quality of a great deal of the average pictures taken today. Many more people can take a

photograph without having to overcome the rudimentary technical challenges of photography. Now, no doubt a well

learned photographer can take over these controls and provide a more directed intepretation of the intended

photograph. However, every "non hobbyist" I know is much happier with the convenience and results of the small

digital cameras available today (or even their phone camera) than the basic cameras we had only a decade ago.

Why people bemoan a review that simply points out the fact the one of the most superlative cameras from a modern

technological perspective, the D3, can indeed provide a lot of automation (if desired -- for example, a very

sophisticated light metering system) and cost less than a camera without all of this is rather puzzling.

 

Lastly, I see now Fang El, not being content with the success (or lack thereof) in "re-educating" the stubborn and

illiterate Leica users through his ever predictable, rather incredolous, bombastic diatribes now simply advocates

direct censorship:

 

"The only person saying anything stupid is Erwin Puts himself. Or do you agree with him that "when you see an

excellent Nikon picture, the camera takes the credit for 75%, where in the case of the Leica the user takes 90% of

the credits"? Because if you don't, then tell him to stop posting that crap on his own site. Censoring it here doesn't

eliminate the source of the problem."

 

But Fang El, what would you do then?

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[joseph_wisniewski]

R Jackson - "Does anyone here ever use their DSLR in manual mode? With CW metering? Spot meter? Dial in exposure compensation?"

 

That question was sort of rolling around in the back of my mind. It just didn't sit right, but it took a while before I realized why this was. This started out as a commentary on an article comparing an M8 to a D3...

 

The M8 user can't easily do any of the things you mention.

 

The M8 doesn't even have a spot meter system, and it's center weight pattern is, well, rather unconventional. The D3 center weighted pattern is exactly as someone with decades of photography experience expects it to be, and it even lets you customize the size of the center weight circle.

 

The M8 puts the exposure compensation system on a menu, where a D3 has it on a dedicated button near the shutter release, pretty much where it's been for 20 years since my old 8008. You set exposure compensation in under 2 seconds, with your eye at the viewfinder. This is a major improvement over the exposure compensator linked to the ISO dial that we used to see in manual cameras.

 

The M8 also can't easily do other things a hard biting manual shooter would do on a D3, like changing ISO or white balance...

 

On D3 ISO is a dedicated button, and a readout in the viewfinder display. The button is in a slightly more awkward place than the exposure compensator button. M8, it's another menu option.

 

White balance on D3 involves taking your eye off the finder, but the dedicated button and dedicated display make it more of a true manual operation than the M8 menu. Setting white balance manually is a "purist" thing, we used to use filters for that in the days of flim.

[el_fang]

<i>Lastly, I see now Fang El, not being content with the success (or lack thereof) in "re-educating" the stubborn

and illiterate Leica users through his ever predictable, rather incredolous, bombastic diatribes now simply

advocates direct censorship:

 

"The only person saying anything stupid is Erwin Puts himself. Or do you agree with him that "when you see an

excellent Nikon picture, the camera takes the credit for 75%, where in the case of the Leica the user takes 90%

of the credits"? Because if you don't, then tell him to stop posting that crap on his own site. Censoring it here

doesn't eliminate the source of the problem."

 

But Fang El, what would you do then?</i>

<P>I was the one who posted the very first response to the OP with the quote containing the "75%" and "90%"

numbers that Puts pulled out of a black top hat. My post was then DELETED by a moderator, and the followup

responses by other thread participants will clue you into that. But hey, <b><u>I</u></b>

didn't write those figures; <b><u>Erwin Puts</u></b> did, and for whatever reason, a moderator thought it

necessary to delete them. Bit revealing, dontcha think? If he's so respected, why didn't said

moderator allow others the opportunity to defend what he wrote instead of attempting to erase it from the

discussion? And while I'm at it, <a

href="http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/camera/page46.html"

target="_blank">here's another Erwin Puts quote</a>:</p>

 

<p><i>The R8 invites you, no induces you take pictures as the great masters did. There is harmony between

instrument, goal and action.</i></p>

 

<p>Wow, really? So what's the difference between the R8 and the D3? Film vs. digital, manual focus vs AF. But

essentially all the same automatic modes are there: Av, Tv, P, matrix metering etc., right? And this was a discussion

about automation,

right? So is it just autofocus, then, that makes the D3 take "75%" credit for the picture? I for one am looking

forward to what he says about the R10.</p>

[el_fang]

<i>Lastly, I see now Fang El, not being content with the success (or lack thereof) in "re-educating"</i>

 

<p>And don't flatter yourself; I'm not trying to re-educate anyone. I just really, really enjoy calling out hypocrisy when I see it.</p>

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

Joseph, to answer your first question, yes. If you can ignore all the rest of what the camera does and *can do* then you

can get to behave Just Like An F. (The very same camera that the E. Puts compared to the M3.)

 

Shutter speed ( in full stops no less!) F- stop set by a ring, CW 60/40 in Manual, motor on SIngle, and its possible to

tune out or turn off the stuff you don't want to see or use.

 

I'm not sure if my previous comments qualifies as E Puts mud slinging, I was pointing out that the F1 analogy was off.

Nothing against the guy. There's a F1 race on in China, you can see what I mean. I personally would prefer shooting a

D3 rather than an M8 at an F1 race, but your style may vary.

 

I've gotten some good perspective on optical design from reading E. Puts, and hey anyone who shoots Kodachrome (or

did) is A-OK in my book.<div></div>

[Tony Rowlett]

El Fang, yes, it reveals that I didn't tolerate your quoting Erwin Puts for <i>no other purpose</i> than for posterity, evidently to show how stupid he is and how smart you are. This forum isn't for that. Please discuss Leica and Rangefinder topics, and if you put forth a disagreement that is impolite or demeaning, or, now, <u>in your specific case</u>, something that <u>approaches</u> being demeaning to Erwin, I'm likely to remove it <i>no matter how correct it seems to you to post it here.</i>

[chris_mearns]

...I just really, really enjoy calling out hypocrisy when I see it...

 

It must be exhausting being Mr Fang, crusading against hypocrisy (the practice of claiming to have moral standards or

beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform).

 

...I'm not trying to re-educate anyone...

 

read the definition above.

 

I like that Mr Puts's opinions get posted here so I can read the next installment and the intense discussion it prompts.

This combination: Puts + reactions makes for some hot threads. Does he provoke loathing because of how good he is

at what we all do and want to do well - making good threads. That would be envy then.

 

Keep loathing him but it really isn't about whether he is right or wrong. Maybe he is a treasure, even when his stuff gets

a bit weird.

[Tony Rowlett]

Since El Fang has hopefully very graciously agreed to my terms, I would like to make sure that the terms are applied equally to everyone, including El. Everyone, just be nice to each other here, and be extra nice to those outside the forum who may not be aware of the topics being discussed. Thank you!