Philip Freedman

<p>Sorry the full size version will not upload but I can assure you that it is sharper and even more detailed than the reduced JPEG when you zoom in !<br>

Philip </p>

<p>Here is a full size TIFF (I hope)</p>

<p>Here is a photo taken on the M9 at ISO 160 with the 1970 Summicron 50 f2 (resaved as a JPEG in sRGB at slightly reduced size - hope this works)<br>

Philip</p><div></div>

<p>Just used my new M9 on this sunny London day, with my Summilux 50 1.4 Asph and my old 1970 Summicron 50 (v 11817), both RAW processed in Lightroom with just a little fill in of shadows and the usual necessary sharpening. Out of the camera in raw the shots are unsharp but they respond to sharpening in L2 fantastically. In both cases great colours and amazing detail at 100%- better than my D700 and Zeiss 50 Planar. Strangely, using the new 50 1.4 aspherical lens results in some chromatic aberration in the form of a little purple fringing around some back-lit subjects, but the old 50 f2 lens is absolutely fine and seems just as sharp! (And, for those who fondle their cameras, it feels like a Leica!).<br>

Philip</p>

 

<p>I mainly use a CZ Planar 50mm 1.4 ZF on my D700. Quite heavy enough so far as I am concerned but not over conspicuous. I can crop and enlarge quite small sections to at least 12 in x 8 ins and get perfectly acceptable results without special interpolation software so I see no need to have a heavy zoom that goes to only 70mm. If I needed a 300mm tele, however, that would not be replaced by cropping, but that does not arise for me. Of course one cannot get more into the frame if there is no room to move back, so I sometimes carry a 28mm 2.8 AIS in my pocket but rarely use it since I am not keen on obvious wide angle effects. The standard 50mm focal length is just fine most of the time for street scenes, people, etc. </p>

<p>Thanks for your comments. Interesting that (contrary to some of the adverts) no-one posting a reply actually said that the springy characteristic of a neoprene strap itself "absorbs" any weight or makes the load feel lighter. I just carried out a little experiment by hanging my camera + lens , via the strap, from a digital scale (used to weigh flight cases), first with an Upstrap and then with an Optech Pro. Guess what - both times the scale showed the weight as 1.50 kg. Even allowing for the scale being a domestic gadget, I suspect the bouncy effect is the only measurable "benefit" from using a neoprene strap and any comfort gain will derive solely from the width of the strap or pad on your shoulder. I think I will use the large version of the Upstrap since it feels more secure, grips the shoulder better, and can be used to tension the camera for slower shutter speeds, even though the wider shoulderpad of the Optech Pro is a little more comfortable. </p>

<p>I admit to suffering from the accessory syndrome - i.e. you cannot have too many camera bags, tripods, filters, lenses etc. As for camera straps, I am still searching for a strap that really does lighten the load. I love using my D700 with a CZ 50 1.4 ZF manual lens but the combination is quite heavy and I am possibly not as young as I used to be. Do neoprene straps really make the load feel lighter or is it all hype?</p>

<p>Thanks Edward.</p>

<p>I need to batch convert and downscale a folder full of 12x8 TIFFs into 6x4 JPEGS for minilab printing and also for uploading onto an online photobook. I have worked out that I need to record an Action to change the image mode from 16 bit to 8 bit and then resize to 6x4 at 300 ppi and then re-save as JPEGs into a new folder, but how do I set this to cater for both landscape and portrait formats? Can an Action in Photoshop sort out itself the landscape from portrait formats or do I first have to manually rotate and re-save each portrait image into landscape format? Any ideas appreciated. Philip</p>

 

<p>You invited a few general Leica/rangefinder tips so here we go: (1) Remember that the viewfinder is by no means as accurate an indication of the frame as the viewfinder of an SLR, so get a cheap film and fire off a few test shots of window frames or poster adverts closely framed and look at the result; (2) if carefully lining things up is part of your composition technique remember that the viewfinder is offset from centre by about an inch and a half ((4 cms) to the left so in those special situations you need to move your head to the left a little before you take the shot; (3) try ignoring the double image focusing and instead focus hyperfocally using the scale on the lens (eg put the infinity sign in line with the aperture stop number); (4) make best use of slow speeds by keeping the shoulder strap short, put it over one shoulder and pull against it for tension when holding the camera to the eye. Best of luck. </p>

<p>My 20mm f4 Ais is nice and sharp but suffers badly from distortion so it is OK for street scenes of people but not so good for buildings.</p>

 

<p>I am thinking of following those who recommend RAW + JPEG. I do find that there is more scope to recover a decent photograph from RAW if there is excessive contrast, colour cast etc, but if I also had JPEGs it would enable me to get cheap "proofs" printed easily at my usual photo shop or on the spot when away. However, rather than give the shop my CF card I would like to copy the JPEGs quickly and easily onto a memory stick and give that to the shop, but my D300 and D700 save the RAW + JPEG to the same CF card. Can someone please give me a link to a simple instruction how to get just the JPEGs onto a memory stick via my PC or laptop? Thanks Philip.</p>

<p>I use the 16-85 on my D300 and am very happy with it. You may need to correct distortion using Photoshop if you include buildings or other subjects with straight lines but it is not a hassle. Only occasionally do I feel 85 is a little short (equates to around 135mm full frame) but the resolution of the D300 allows cropping and enlarging quite considerably (for non-comnmercial use).</p>

<p>I have both a D700 and a D300. The big difference for me is the much larger viewfinder screen of the D700. It is much easier to compose your shot and much better for manual focusing if you need it. (I wear spectacles and those who do not may not mind the smaller screen of the D300). The quality of the photographs are much the same within normal parameters although as others have said the D700 is a little better at the higher ISOs.</p>

 

<p>Most of us English pronounce it "Kni-con" - with a silent k as in knickers.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks to all of you for your help. Most appreciated<br>

Happy New Year<br>

Philip</p>

<p>I have just bought CS4 and would like to try using ACR as my raw converter for all my raw images (from my D700 as well as other cameras). I find Capture NX2 rather awkward to use and expect ACR to integrate more easily with Photoshop, and ACR under CS4 now has the local adjustment facility similar to NX2. Can anyone recommend some basic Sharpening settings to use in ACR on my D700 images? In NX2 I have been using (based on Jason Odell's e-book) intensity 40, radius 5, threshold 2, but I am not sure how these equate to the settings in ACR. Can anyone help please?</p>

I have a Katzeye and it is excellent but I had difficulty fitting it and eventually ended up taking all the bits into my local camera repair shop to do it for me. The warnings that come with the kit should be heeded. Don't try to do it yourself unless you are good at microsurgery.

Philip

Now I have a D700 and a D300 I can add a few observations from some NON-scientific test shots. Possibly due to the greater density of pixels in the D300 it seems that enlarging a crop produces very slightly more resolution than using the D700 at low ISOs. However the overall color gradation and feel of the picture is rather better with the D700 as is the low light capability and the larger viewfinder is a very important benefit - the D300 is tunnel like by comparison. I am happy with both cameras but much prefer the D700. I repeat that my comments derive from wholly nonscientific testing and others may get different results,so please exercise restraint when responding !

 

Philip

I confess. I sold my M8, since I hated its handling, and bought a D300, but kept my M6 and MP. I took my D300 to Rome (mainly using a 35mm prime lens - equivalent to 56mm) and took my MP and 50 Summilux Asph to Venice. Within a few days from coming home from Rome I was holding a nice hardbound Cewe photobook of my best Rome photographs. It is now three weeks since we came back from Venice and I am still mounting and scanning my Leica shots - a boring task. While I like fondling my beautiful MP/Summilux, the truth is that the D300 handles well, I can immediately see if a photo has come out as intended, and for an enthusiastic but busy amateur like me the fully-digital process is so much easier. A work colleague has a darkroom and loves the results of wet printing his FP3 negs from his Leica kit, but that is true dedication to which I don't aspire. I've now traded my "old" 5D kit for a D700 and 50 1.4 lens, and can hardly see myself using my Leica much from now on. Philip

As an enthusiastic amateur I, too, find my 24-105 f/4 L lens too big, heavy and attention-catching (especially with its large petal lens-hood) for use as a city walkabout lens and I much prefer my 50 f/1.4 which I find very sharp and handy. But can anyone recommend a genuinely light-weight and small-sized mid-range zoom that is of sufficient quality to use on the 5D where a prime lens like to 50 is a little too restrictive?

 

Thanks, Philip

Can anyone recommend a photo lab in Venice, Italy, to process and proof silver B&W neg film and process slide

film? Thanks Philip

I am selling my latest version 50 Summicron (built in hood) because of flare - I recently took some photographs of a building where the roofline was just out of the frame and in many of them there was serious flare from the bright cloudy sky above the roof - like a white ghost floating in the middle upper part of the frame. My Leica dealer in London confirmed that it was lens flare.

I have just put my current model 50 Summicron up for sale - it suffers badly from flare where the sky or sum is just outside the frame, even using the hood. Optically it is fine but I cannot live with the flare which looks like a swirl of fog in the upper middle of several shots. I believe the lenses vary on this problem.

It is a reflected light meter so it meters whatever objects are seen within the circle, however close or far away they are. It is usually easier to meter nearby mid-tones such as grass or grey road surfaces. Dont't forget that the circle is larger for wide angle lenses and smaller for longer lenses. From memory the TTL signifies the flash metering - even the classic M6 meters through-the-lens for for non-flash.