matt_sachs

Michael, what you say is true; I misread. The book includes a collection of essays. I parsed the text of the NYR article subtitle incorrectly, which includes the final line, "by Jane Brenton," which is NYR's standard way of assigning authorship.

The July 3, 2003 New York Review of Books has an informative article

by John Banville entitled "Secret Geometry" that discusses HCB and

Jane Brenton's book of essays, "Henri Cartier-Bresson: the Man, the

Image and the World."

"When you look through this new Leica digital real-life viewfinder,

you immediately recognize the superior image quality produced by its

high performance Elmarit-Vario ASPH triple zoom lens."

hope he doesn't disappear through an aperture

No words from me on this except "FYI."

The answer was revealed subsequently: it is an electric lighting artifact that occurs in some sporting arenas with fast shutter speeds and the slow-synch M shutter.

 

See:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0045j1

Dear Kelly,

 

Thank you for providing these data. It seems that your explanation covers why the problem would "disappear" when I stopped down the lens because I reduced the high shutter speed (1/500) -- things got better as shutter remained open longer, presumably because the synch issue improved. It also explains the arbitrary positioning of the bands on different frames of the same section of arena.

 

Matt

Strictly at the frameline and strictly at wide aperture.

Greetings, All:

 

The attached photograph is no prize-winner, but it illustrates a

problem I am having with a Noctilux lens at f1. Specifically, not

only is there vignetting, but there are color-shifts that do not

correspond to the vignette. Is this performance typical for the lens?

I purchased mine used and do not know whether it is example-specific.

 

Thank you,

 

Matt<div></div>

In case that image is difficult to interpret, I adjusted levels and contrast in photoshop (no color-specific adjustments)<div></div>

Note the red swath in the center of this this image. Formal test images and negs sent to Leica with camera.<div></div>

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I don't thinks it's a lens issue, since it is happening with both lenses.

Greetings,

 

I purchased a used 50mm Noctilux f1 and put it on my M7 body earlier

this week; brick red vertical exposure stripes/bands are appearing

now (typically 2 of them, fairly dense, each approx 1/4-1/5 the

frame). It also happens now with my 35mm 'Lux 1.4 that I've had for

months and had not noticed was causing a problem previously. As I

stop down with either lens, the stripes lose intensity.

 

I expect its time to send it to Leica for Passport repair. But I feel

it is important to know what causes this.

 

Thank you for any information you might have on this problem.

I don't have experience with any M but the M7, but for this I must agree with Roger, that one can sense when a problem with flare is going to occur. I, too, would be interested to know how the SHADE works to ameliorate this problem. Recently I was shooting an event at a large indoor Civic Center Stadium from the floor and the banks of sodium halide lights mounted in the upper regions of the building that all pointed down and in at the floor made using the rangefinder incredibly frustrating. Moving my eye or the angle of the camera (horizontal, vertical or any intermediate angle) had minimal effect when shooting in the direction of the action and I haven't worked out a way to easily hold the camera to shoot action, focus, and shield the prisms from highly directional light with only two hands.

 

My specific interest is dog agility photography (http://www.cleanrun.com/moreinfo.cfm?Product_ID=971 and http://www.cleanrun.com/moreinfo.cfm?Product_ID=1008 are two recent magazine cover photos of mine representing this work). Outdoors, my Canon tele-zooms rule; but indoors without flash (many locations require shooting at 250 1.4 with 800 film and even this shutter speed is bordering on slow for dogs that run 4 yards per second and are only meters away), the results with the Leica 35 Lux wide-open are stunning and in a heartbeat I would prefer to obtain a 50 nocti or 75 1.4 over the equivalent Canon glass on the assumption that the luminousness and sharpness of the 35 are retained in these longer lenses but for focusing concerns.

 

So... does the SHADE work?

Information point -

A full page ad for the M7 with the text, "The Leica has a subtext, a

poetry and magic no other machine has," appears on p. 23 of the 23

Sept 2002 New Yorker magazine

Check the films that interest you on the skin-tones that interest you. While Supra is a great film for colors and textures, you may not find it satisfactory to give skin the tones that you wish.

I've also been keeping an eye on the "wrong ASA" issue when the M7 is turned on. Inserting the film cartridge past the "click" is important as noted previously. Yet this problem has recurred when I have taken the M7 on trail runs in a padded pack; presumably the jouncing is moving the cartidge around. While it has not happened often enough that I can claim this is a 100% fix, it seems that taking up slack with the rewind knob has helped in these cases.

Greetings, All:

 

While using estimates of distance for choosing the focus-point has its

merits for speed, I would be grateful to learn how other photographers

choose specific subject detail for evaluating focus using the

split-image system quickly, and how do they do the evaluation? That

is, what are the preferred target areas for evaluating the convergence

of the split-image (e.g., on a human figure or face?) What technique

(move the focusing ring past, then back?)

 

My limited experience focusing by split-image only without

ground-glass (M7 vs SLR) is that when there are edges at the correct

distance, it seems relatively easy to quickly get to the correct focus

by split-image. But it seems not so easy to focus on specific points

in scenes containing repetitive elements (e.g., a field of flowers) or

in low-contrast situations in general.

 

Thank you.

The AE is a great feature for my shooting style; I snapped at the M7

after wanting an M6 for many years but not obtaining one because I

didn't want to be forced to meter manually (although of course I often

do work this way). It is quite rapid to set the aperture, meter for

where "middle gray" should be, lock the exposure with a partial

shutter press to fix the shutter speed, and proceed. If I change my

mind, I just let up on the release, move the camera a little to fish

another shutter speed, trap with a partial press, and continue.

 

<p>

 

There is one thing to consider in your assessment, since it wasn't

obvious to me just by reading the specs, and is my major complaint

about the M7. With my EOS3 I can really use the exposure compensation

dial on the back "on the fly" instead of the catch and release

approach with the shutter button described above. The M7 requires you

hold a button with one hand while twirling a dial with the other,

which is not so much fun to do with the camera at eye level while

there is action going on. Indeed, people who use the

camera manually have it better for tweaking exposure than those who

use it automatically and would want to use exposure compensation to

quickly tweak the exposure. Furthermore, the "0" setting on the

compensation dial has the same click-feel as the other settings, so

you need to keep count of where you are (+/-6 clicks) or look to see

where you are compensation-wise. While purists who like an

uncluttered finder might shudder, the EOS3 is great since it gives you

exposure compensation settings right in the viewfinder. Possibly

someone on the list knows the proper "manual of arms" to use the

compensation dial more satisfactorily?

Eliot's point is well taken. For curiosity, I searched the EOS3

archives on yahoogroups with "DX," since I have read postings there

for a long time and didn't recall this being a discussion point, and

found two independent occurrences out of more than 10,000 posts from

1999 (the beginning of the archives) onward reporting this problem

(numbers 4696 and 7250). In both cases, the problem was only with ASA

200 film. So, that several of the relatively small group of M7 users

who also read this group have encountered this problem with two

different films in the short time they've had their cameras may

already be significant.

Greetings, All:

 

<p>

 

My M7 also "forgot" it was loaded with Supra 400 recently, though it initially detected it correctly. When partially through a roll, it flashed ASA 100 when turned on several times in a row (this maneuver on the part of the M7 was associated with a "What the ***?" sound-track from yours truly); then it got with the program again and flashed ASA 400. Having shot with Canon EOS bodies for many years now, without this ever having been a concern (indeed, I hadn't considered it even to be a possible problem!) and noting that a recent post concerning Velvia in the M7 also noted a similar problem, I am curious as to how common an occurrence this is proving to be.

 

<p>

 

Thank you for any light you can shed on this.

Best,

Matt

Greetings, All:

 

<p>

 

This is not a Leica-specific question but given the interests of others using these cameras for available light there is likely great knowledge to help me with this.

 

<p>

 

I went with the M-system and a fast 35 lens to get back to available light photography with no fill flash -- I shoot mostly ASA400 color print film. This is proving highly rewarding except when shooting indoors with room light. Predictably, these photos have the orange cast that comes from using daylight film with incadescent bulbs.

 

<p>

 

Does one just endure, or is there (preferably a single) filter that Leica-philes use in these situations?

 

<p>

 

Thank you.

 

<p>

 

Matt

Something similar happened to me when changing rolls with the M7 and

fortunately things unstuck. But I could not fire the shutter until I

rewound the (unexposed) film (carefully, to leave the leader).

Unfortunately for Anam things did not resolve so easily. I suspected

at the time it was because I was in AE mode with the lens cap on when

doing the frame advances and the meter made the decision for max

exposure time (many seconds) and I wasn't clued into this while I was

winding to go to the -1 frame since I wasn't looking in the finder.

Now I am careful to move out of AE mode and to set a shutter speed

when shooting the -2 and -1

frames with the lens cap on.

 

<p>

 

Not that I am satisfied with this arrangement...

 

<p>

 

Matt

Greetings, All:

 

<p>

 

Forgive my ignorance here.

 

<p>

 

Spinning the aperture dial on the 35mm lens, and looking at the diaphragm blades, there is an extra click beyond each of the marked extremes that affects the blades as expected. Are there 1/4-or-so stops (guessing the number here) beyond the stated aperture range that are "valid"?

 

<p>

 

Matt Sachs

mattsachs@attbi.com

Thank you. Clicking heels together 3 times (rather, 300 or so lock to

lock movements) appears to be acieving my wish for smooth helical action.

 

<p>

 

Matt