dayton_p._strickland1

Ray,

I would suggest that if you are going to purchase an AF lens to

be used in manual focusing you will be very disappointed. AF

lenses have way too much slop in them to be manually focused.

Pick up any two focal length lenses and you will see what I

mean, the autofocus lenses might only turn 3/4 turn from infinity

to minimum focus whereas the manual focus lens will probably

take three turns lock to lock. I find it near impossible to manually

focus an AF lens precisely which is a shame because there are

many times with an AF camera that manual focusing works

better in many situations. In addition with an AF camera and a

manually focused lens you don't have the benefit of a

ground-glass viewfinder image nor a split-image rangefinder to

confirm focus. The confirm-focus dot on AF cameras is pretty

much a joke in my opinion. Unless you need rapid focusing such

as in moving subjects or sports I would go manual.

Ian, thanks for the information. Your websites are great and you

are one very talented guy. I assume, from looking at your

websites, that you are working as a professional photographer.

Are both you and your wife doing the photography and what does

she think of the Bessa? Again, very, very good work. I'm

impressed.

Great photos Ian. I live on the other side of Atlanta (Cartersville)

and would be very interested in knowing what lab you used (if it's

a chain). I use Leica and for work a D100 and I must say I wish

we were still shooting film sometimes (except on deadline when

digital is a godsend) so I could use my Leica more. Have fun in

Athens! The Rome Tribune News is looking for a photojournalist

if you know of anyone who might be interested. The job is posted

on the GPA website (gapress.org).

>>> AF speed, shutter lag, on current digitals????? You have got

to mean the P&S toys, not the Nikon and Canon DSLRs. <<<

Mostly the P&S toys but these problems do exist on the lower

end of some DSLRs (i.e., my Nikon D100 which I believe has

superb white balance and color and is nearly noiseless (read:

grain) at 1,600 when exposed properly.

Sorry about the quality of that picture. It sure looked a lot better

before I resized it! Embarrassing!

This will mean we will be able to get all the digital advantages �

adjustable ISO, adjustable white balance, exposure confirmation

� without all the digital drawbacks (or shall I say digital camera

drawbacks) such as sluggish shutter release, poor autofocus

performance (and before you say it, have you ever tried to

manually focus an autofocus lens?), mirror-slap noise, mirror

blackout, etc. Hopefully this means we will get the good

technology without being saddle with all the bad.<div></div>

Wrong, Peter, re-read the following part of the article:

"Pricey though Jeff's gear may be, I think someone working with

more mundane glass, for example, might still be able to get

good available light results by using faster film, like Ilford's

fantastic Delta 3200, which Judy and I love for low-light

shooting."

Gang, here's another interesting article from VanRiper:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/i

ndex.htm

Not intended to start the film versus digital discussion, please!

Rock, what Bruce says is the correct answer technically and I

agree 100 percent. I have the same problem as you with the

D100 and fast lenses. Our sports editor shoots with a D100 and

a really slow 70-210/4-5.6 lens and doesn't have the problem

shooting at 1,250 ISO.... so I now shoot manually at 1/180th

(showing 200th on the top screen) at F4 with all my lenses with

the flash on full TTL, rear curtain sync and my flash blur (as I call

it) has just about disappeared. I've also gone to using a

Stroboframe to get the flash above the camera to reduce redeye

and that also has really helped. Late last season I got to shoot

some state playoff stuff in a professional venue and boy, what a

difference. Once you get used to the D100's lag time and slow

buffer you can really capture some great looking images. By the

way, have you all seen that Canon has upped the ante over the

D2H? Whew � too rich for my blood, but it sure does sound

sweet.<div></div>

Try this without the space in index, or go to Camera Works on the

Washington Post website and look for the VanRiper article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/index.html

Thought you all might find this article interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/i

ndex.htm

After reviewing my work from last year (my first full year of SLR

digital) for the annual journalism contests, I'm personally starting

to wonder if I spent too much time in the learning curve with

digital or "chimping" and not enough time working the subject

matter.

Jack, I'm glad you are enjoying photography again. Cameras and

lenses that make you slow down and think make you a better

photographer, period. Your slice of life photograph is very good

and as good as anyone else's slice of life photograph by all

measures. By the way, summer gigs at local newspapers don't

make anyone a better photographer or more knowledgeable. I've

shot Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Leica gear for years and if

someone can't see the difference in quality, well, they just can't

see and probably should try a different line of work. It's like

people who can't hear the difference in a good vinyl playback

system compared to a CD. Any discussion is just lost on them.

A friend of mine just made the switch back to MF with the FM-3a

and a 24/2.0 MF lens and he has never been happier. Autofocus

can be a real pain in the butt and unless you are shooting very

fast moving subjects in contrasty light there is no real advantage

(i.e., to get descent shots at a high school basketball game in a

very dimly lit gym Friday night I had to switch to manual focus as

the AF was way too slow and would hunt against the grey

jerseys). Also MF lenses focus so much more smoothly and

accurately than AF ones � as they say on the net "IMHO."

Thanks everyone for your input. I had been trying to buy from

B&H, Adorama or the local Wolf (read: Ritz) Camera stores with

absolutely no luck. Eric, I will try to contact you direct and see if

you can sell me one. Thanks!

Are there any reliable sources out there that know for sure when

the D2H and the 12-24/4 zoom lens will be available? I can't get

a straight answer from anyone.

This certainly is a step in the right direction � HOWEVER �

every electronic viewfinder I have used has been a major pain in

the butt. Why not go with a fixed lens and rangefinder focusing.

For me, at least, that would have been a better choice, this, of

course, is assuming one cannot design a rangefinder for a

zoom lens or can one? I hope some photojournalists get their

hands on this camera and give us a real review instead of

reviews full of fixed subject pictures.

Thank you Sanford! Sounds like a great product. Looks like I

might buy two, one for my M-6 and one for the FM-3a. Thanks

again.

Does anyone out there know of an auxillary grip one can

purchase for the Nikon FM-3a similar to the one for the Leica

M-series cameras? The MD-12 motordrive is just too heavy for

the benefit of having a grip. I'm hoping that some company

makes one.

Considering events centered around I-270 south of Columbus,

Ohio, recently, you might want to change your forum topic title

before the 'guv-mint starts paying you a visit. '-)

Photography-wise you might have better luck with an SLR and

some very wide angle lenses if you are trying to get really artsy

with your shots. The photographer that does most of the stuff for

Road & Track magazine does some incredible work so be sure

to check out his work to get some ideas.

Donald,

You are leaving yourself wide-ass open on this one ... ;-)

Ditto to everything Chris Lutz said. The shutter lag will drive you

nuts if you are used to any kind of camera that responds to input.

The build quality and ergonomics are very good for this class. I

just wish the camera was a fixed lens and manual focus

rangefinder ala Olympus XA. I think that would resolve the

problem with AF hunt (duh!) and shutter lag. Also, I really wish

the excellent website dpreview.com would address shutter lag in

its reviews and try the cameras in some kind of street or

documentary photo mode instead of still subjects, it would be a

great help.

All of this begs the question, at least for me, is why do high

quality digital cameras and lenses have to be so large? If Canon

and Olympus can make great little digital point and shooters with

fast zoom lenses (G5 and Oly 5050) why can't someone PLEASE

make a quality manual focusing interchangeable lens digital

rangefinder camera? Having used both M cameras and Nikon

SLR digital cameras I feel Jack's pain. I want the precision and

feel of a M-rangefinder with the flexibility of digital color control

(white balance) and adjustable sensitivity (ISO changes). Now,

is someone out there in the vast camera making world

listening?

Great composition, great color, interesting subject � what else

is there to say except that it is a great slice of life picture, the best

kind in my opinion. Good work.

Jenny, I don't think there is an immediate need until there comes

along a new technology that will significantly improve cameras in

that price range. The D100 price has dropped to be competitive

with the Canon 10D and is easily the equal of that camera. This

is one time a camera manufacturer (Nikon and the D100) has

done it right from the start. The ergonomics are near perfect and

the only improvement I can image would be a little bit less

shutter lag and possibly a higher shutter sych speed, other than

those two things I think Nikon should be congratulated for getting

it right the first time>

I think it is safe to say the reason we like the Leica M product is

because of the feel of the camera, the focusing and viewfinder

and the quality of the lenses and the end result. Right now that is

only available on film, but someday if it should be available in

digital that certainly would be OK with me. I do not like SLRs, I do

not like most Point and Shoot cameras and I have found almost

all of the digital offerings out there right now great in end result

(SLR) but a pain in the ass to use or lacking in a hard to

describe pleasantness (P&S). The biggest advantage in digital

to me personally is being able to use the proper ISO (sensitivity)

setting for the need at hand and a pretty low noise (grain) level at

higher (1,600) ISO.