geddert

A thread like this pops up at photo.net every other day or so - i

recommend checking it out there. The de facto standard for personal

desktop scanners is the Nikon 4000ED, i just got mine from

Deltainternational.com at a great price (right now they lowered it

even more to something like $1298). This scanner is all i could hope

for, and is great for printing with an Epson 1280.

 

<p>

 

Matthew

here's a comment about the longevity of digital storage. I personally

think that digital storage is much safer and better then slide

storage. Yes, it does take work to keep up with the new technology.

When you see CD's being faded out for holographic storage chips that

look cool and are placed on a ring on your finger, why not do the

work of putting those 200 CD's in your computer and moving it to the

new medium. If you save the files as a standard format (like .tiff

or .psd) and buy big hard drives you should be able to keep it for a

while. When the file standards start to change, all it takes is

running a batch program on photoshop 17.5 and converting all the .psd

files to .xyz. The reason people think digital data will be obsolete

is that they don't realize that it requires a little work every 5 to

10 years... but in return you won't get fading, and you can have a

copy at home, work and somewhere on the internet, so natural

disasters are much less likely to destroy your work.

KL,

 

<p>

 

I would go with the lightweight Gitzo CF's... and I have a G1128

(four leg sections instead of 3 on the G1127) that has never been

taken out of the house... i intended to use it with small cameras,

but have found that i only need a tripod for my SLR system... if i

need a small camera i don't want a tripod. Thus I am selling mine...

and will be selling it on Auction for America (all proceeds go to the

Red Cross)... if you are interested in buying it, it is truly in new

shape (only used around the house a few times) for testing with the

original box and all that. I have found that a Leica large ball and

socket is the best ballhead for this legset (which has a socket that

can be reversed for this smaller size as well as the normal one -

i.e. Arca Swiss B1). The Leica Large ball is the best lightweight

ballhead you can buy (in my opinion)... the only disadvantage is that

it doesn't have tension, which really isn't much of a problem unless

you are shooting animals or sports with long tele lenses. If you want

to dontate $450 to the Red Cross, i will ship it to you in the

Contitnetal US (please only do this if this is above and beyond what

you would have donated to charity anyways... otherwise the charity

simply looses out on the value of the tripod)... i have references in

photo.net's User Recommendation section. Gitzo's website is at

www.gitzo.com... prices can be found at the standard in US

photographic suppliers: www.bhphotovideo.com... or also

www.robertwhite.co.uk, which tends to have good prices (i bought mine

there, but you have to remember to add shipping - about $60 - and

import fees, which vary with the value of the order).

 

<p>

 

If you have any more questions please don't hessitate to ask.

 

<p>

 

Matthew

let me try that again - it didn'

t work because the link is too long and went in to two lines, if this

doesn't work, please copy and paste the first and second parts of

this link.

 

<p>

 

http://www.leica-

camera.com/unternehmen/international/usa/events/index_e.html

One thing you should check out is "leica days" these are days in

which stores often sell all their leica stuff for 10% off, on top of

that you can get the $200 rebate from leica before the end of this

year. I just bought an M6 TTL for 1540 (after rebates) with a USA

warranty, from Samy's - not too shabby if you ask me. Most lenses

seem to be about the same price with these discounts either USA or

Gray, thus obviously one should buy the USA one. The only two lenses

from Samy's that were still more expensive were the noctilux and

35/1.4 ASPH. For a list of leica day events around the use go to this

page, and then a call up the stores to see if they offer 10% off on

those days:

<p>

<a href=http://www.leica-

camera.com/unternehmen/international/usa/events/index_e.html">http://w

ww.leica-

camera.com/unternehmen/international/usa/events/index_e.html</a>

Mark,

<br><br>

As a recent graduate of UC Berkeley I feel as if i have some

perspective as to the protesters from that area of the world. I do

not think "most" of them are air heads. Now, you may call them

airheads, but UC Berkeley remains one of the top 10 Universities in

this country in terms of Academic Reputation for one simple reason -

there aren't too many airheads there (although they are some for

sure). i think the people you (and I) disagree with are simply

idealists. I for one am not one, and that is why i will help the

world to continue as it is.

<br><br>

In Berkeley many people are idealists... many will be scoffed for

their radical beliefs, but in the end idealists are the ones that

change the world. In the 20th century I can name a few idealists:

Hitler (I didn't agree with his idealism, but he did have

an "ideal"), M. L. King, Einstein... i know these people are used

excessively and are cliched, but the fact remains that they saw a

problem with the current state of affairs and wanted to change it

(for the better or worse). Idealists are needed to counter "us"

realists - those that have lost or have never had the faith in human

kind to induce radical change. I wish i were the idealist I was 10

years ago, but in the end that passion has disappeared.... it is sad

that there aren't more protests around this country, and that people

feel that being hardened to the ways of the world is a great thing.

<ul>

<i>Imagine there's no countries

<br>It isn't hard to do

<br>Nothing to kill or die for

<br>And no religion too

<br>Imagine all the people

<br>Living life in peace...</i>

</i>

<ul>

<br>- John Lennon

</ul>

</ul>

I personally cannot imagine such a place, but there is no need to

claim anybody with such ideals is an "airhead." For many this would

be an ideal world...

<br>

<br>

As a side note, I like your argument about religion. I personally

think no religion (as a confining institution) would be great - then

we wouldn't be hindered in our communion with God, through ridiculous

fanatics like many tele-evangelists or hard-line Islamic terrorists

<ul><i>Traveler: "But this is film?"

<br><br>Security: "All means ALL! The x-ray won't hurt your film if

it's under 1000."</i>

</ul>

I have gotten around this for years (including many third world

countries). Here is what you do... you put one roll of 3200 speed

film in one of your ziplock bags and say you have film rated at 3200

speed in there. They will complain because they don't want to do it

(and are lazy)... you then insist, and exclaim that it would ruin

your job and that those 50 rolls (or in my case last time it was 140)

are vital for your career... Until now i have had a 100% success

rate, even in airports that have a "everything must be scanned"

policy. Since Sept. 11th I haven't flown... things may have changed,

but one roll of 3200 speed film in a bag with your slower film gets

you passed that rule.

 

Things may be different now, so i have two lead bags, Jack, i would

be very interested in hearing your results....

 

 

Matthew

 

My Complaint:

P.S. I think this whole new emphasis on security in airports is good -

HOWEVER, i don't think what they are doing will help much. A soldier

standing in the terminal with a gun will not help a plane being

hijacked in the air... Twice as many scanning people won't help

either... you start out with underpaid and trained people, and add a

bunch of rookies - who are we kidding! What would help is to REALLY

train the people that have been working there for years. One good

person beats 4 bad people any day when looking at an X-ray scanner.

It bothers me that the american public actually thinks these things

help security much! What really helps security and will take a while

to implement are impenetrable doors in planes, sky marshals and the

like... what is happening now just wastes peoples time and makes them

feel safe - i guess that feeling is really all that matters to save

the industry.

Thank you everybody for your recommendations. I guess i'll just have

to go out and read a book. I haven't been to a public library in a

while, it should be fun to check it out. If that fails there is

always online book stores that stock everything.

 

<p>

 

Thanks again,

 

<p>

 

Matthew

 

<p>

 

P.S. Rob, great photo! This is exactly the type of use i had been

contemplating, and it is a marvelous example

Hello, until now in all my years of serious shooting (about 6) i have never really used a flash on my cameras because i like the look and feel of available light photography. I am truly clueless when it comes to flash settings and the use of a flash on any camera. What i am wondering is what is involved with using a flash on a non-TTL M6 camera - is it all a matter of guessing and hoping you are right? How accurate can one "guess" the amount of flash needed? Does a TTL M6 camera do a better job of using the flash (the M6 is completely mechanical, so how would it compensate for the flash used - or does it pre-fire and then you manually put in what it tells you to).

 

<p>

 

Thanks for enlightening me.

I too am trying to decide between the Canon and Nikon. I have found

two very good reviews that are worth checking out

<ul>

<li>The site with the reviews is here: <a href="http://www.imaging-

resource.com/SCAN/FS4000/FS40A.HTM">http://www.imaging-

resource.com/SCAN/FS4000/FS40A.HTM</a>

<li>Canoscan 4000: <a href="http://www.imaging-

resource.com/SCAN/FS4000/FS40A.HTM">http://www.imaging-

resource.com/SCAN/FS4000/FS40A.HTM</a>

<li>Nikon 4000ED: <a href="http://www.imaging-

resource.com/PRODS/LS4K/L40A.HTM">http://www.imaging-

resource.com/PRODS/LS4K/L40A.HTM</a>

</ul>

Well, bird photography <b>starts</b> at 600. I have a 400, and it

ain't close to enough in almost all situations, so i resign myself to

shooting mammals. Actually, i would probably recommend, that if you

are serious about bird photography that you seriously consider

getting a Canon 600/4 IS and a 1.4X TC and a Canon EOS 1V body. Leica

glass although I'm sure it is good (I haven't used it), has one huge

limitation with this type of focal lengths - it doesn't have image

stabalization, which is VERY useful for stabalizing a 840/f4 lens

even though it is on a tripod... Then again, that is a huge financial

outlay, including the tripod you are looking at 11k-12k, so you would

have to be very serious (likewise any telephoto leica lens will

hurt). Auto focus is also extremely useful in shooting small moving

subjects. If you are less serious, but willing to pay 4500 for a

280/4 i would seriously consider a EOS 3 with a 300/2.8 IS with

teleconverters... this gives you a 300/2.8, 420/4 and 600/5.6 all

with autofocus... (at a cost of about 600 with TC's and the body) I

know it ain't a leica, but Canon does know how to make big telephoto

lenses very well (look at the big white lenses at the next sporting

event you see on TV). A "cheap" alternative (the one i have) is to

use a Canon body (I use the EOS 1V), but the EOS 3 would do well as

well, with a 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS L, its small for the focal length and

publishably sharp and IS really works well, i get tack sharp hand

held shots at 400 at as slow as 1/125sec (with good technique)...

that will set you back 1500 for the lens (new, i got mine used for

1100), and either 800 or 1500 for the body (I got my 1V HS used for

1300).

I choose black and white for almost all of my indoor shots (primarily

of people) - because I think it not only looks "better" but also

because I haven't found any color film above 100 speed that I like

(thus I almost exclusivly use 400 or 3200 speed B&W film). It is also

very nice to not have to worry about a magenta or green color cast

from indoor lights. I use color slide film (I like Provia 100F) for

outdoor shooting during the day time - this is what I load in my

Ricoh GR1 (which goes everywhere with me). If the roll will be used

both outside and indoors I tend to choose whichever type of film I

have more/older rolls of.

I really need to learn to spell and use grammar correctly (you would

think 18 years of school would have taught me that) � or maybe I just

need to proofread before posting a comment.

I've never used this gizmo - which just seems awkward to me. However,

I can recommend a good way to have two lenses on you without a camera

bag is to wear cargo pants (lots of film can fit in these pockets as

well as lenses). It's worked will for me in the past and not required

anything special.

The number one thing I think they should concentrate on is reducing

costs without sacrificing quality. Since they won't do this (because

there are too many freaks - like me - still willing to pay for their

stuff) it would be nice if they worked on an M7. The most important

advances I would be looking for would be AE (thus necessitating an

electronic shutter - which i would hope would be even quieter than

the current one - if that is possible) and better film loading, i

like manual wind/rewind so I wouldn't want a motor for that. Reduced

size (if possible) would also be nice but definitely not very

important since these things are already pretty small.

have you tried taking out a ruler and measuring it? my guess would be

that it is a 46mm (because this is a common Leica filter size). Leica

seems to go from 39-46-49-55-60, normally a manufacturer won't make

something very odd in comparison.

Eric, No, i do not own a home. I am actually signing up with the

insurance agent my entire family (parents, brothers, sister...) uses.

I used to personally have car insurance with this agent, but have

since sold my car and stopped paying for that (I live in the SF Bay

area and a car is a waste of money, and an enormous headache to own

here - i ride a bicycle instead). I called another State Farm agent

and asked about a PAF for camera stuff and he was very reluctant to

sell it to me but was grudgingly willing to do it (he seemed like the

type that wasn't going to fight to hard for me to get money for me

from the underwriter so i decided not to go with him). So i called up

our families State Farm agent, and he had no problem doing it, since

my parents and siblings all insure pretty much everything other than

health insurance through him, and I had been a client in the past, he

had no problem signing me up for this. I also trust that he

would 'fight' for me if need be to get money from the underwriter -

for example if my camera was stolen in Africa and I couldn't get a

police report to prove it, i think he could probably convince them to

still reimburse me. Currently my camera PAF is the only insurance I

personally have with him (I am not on some kind of "family account,"

but rather a personal account). I highly recommend calling your

current car or renters insurance agent and asking them about a PAF.

If not you can probably get some other agent to let you sign up for

it, but you may have to phone around a bit.

A 80 in 6x6 is roughly equal to a 50 in 35mm. HCB shot with a 50mm his whole life, you can check out if a 50 works for portraits by checking out his work at:

<p>

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/museums/photogallery/bresson/index.htm">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/museums/photogallery/bresson/index.htm</a>

<p>

You can also check out a discussion here at photo.net from last november about whether a 50mm lens (i.e. your 80 in 6x6) is good for portrait work at this link:

<p>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0017u0">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0017u0</a>

I used to have a policy that I don't buy insurance for anything that

i can afford to loose (a camera and car would fall under this, a

house wouldn't)... but I recently discovered that my State Farm agent

will cover my camera gear under a PAF (Personal Article Floater) for

just 1.25% the cost of the equipment per year. So, for a new Leica M6

with a 50/1.4 = $3000, you get insurance for just $37.50 per year.

This insurance is amazing, it not only covers theft (anywhere in the

world no matter what) but also my own stupidity (dropping the camera)

and regular stuff (i.e. if the rangefinder needs to be realigned they

will fix it). I really don't see how they can make money on this

stuff, but then again, they make money on my family because we have

other types of insurance (like mandatory car insurance) with them. I

think this insurance is definitely worth it if you travel much, it

gives you peace of mind. You can leave the camera in a hotel room,

and go out for the day without worrying about a maid taking it, or

somebody breaking in to the room (a big concern in hotels in poorer

areas of the world). It is probably a good idea to get it even if you

don't travel, simply because it is better than a passport warrenty

and costs less (because you can buy gray market camera equipment).

Thanks to everybody for your replies. I think I am going to build

this system one lens at a time as some of you have suggested doing.

Without electro everything zoom lenses (i.e. SLR's) I am going to

have to really learn how to "see" pictures with a Leica.

 

<p>

 

This way I will also know if i need the speed or perfer lighter

weight for new purchases. I think I will start with the lens my heart

longs for most, the 50 Summilux. I know this doesn't make much

logical sense (because I will probably end up getting the Noctilux in

the future - but then again, paying for a leica doesn't make that

much sense in the first place). I really like low light shooting, and

a 50 is my favorite perspective, plus I simply want one... plus if i

wait to buy maybe I can afford the fastest lenses in all of these

lengths =)

 

<p>

 

Thanks again for your responses.

First off, thanks to everybody for your answers to my previous post.

 

<p>

 

Now, here comes one more question. I am new to Leica M's and am trying to get a good ballhead for the one I will be buying. I just bought a Gitzo 1128 legset (the lightest 4 section CF "full height" tripod available). I would like as small and lightweight a ballhead as possible to go with this legset. I am used to the an Arca Swiss B1, but that seems like overkill (weight wise) for such a "small" camera and light tripod. I would like a ballhead that does not creep, when tightened down, can "flop down" for verticles, and would prefer one that has can pan, but the last one isn't necessary. These are all characteristics of the Arca Swiss B1, and I am essentially looking for a smaller and lighter version of that ballhead. My specific concerns are:

<ul>

<li>Is a Quick Release system (like the Really Right Stuff plates - with Arca Swiss) necessary for this camera when shooting in verticals - i.e. when the ball is "flopped" down will the camera twist on its own mount? This was necessary with SLR's but due to decrease size I thought it may not be necessary with the leica... what has your experience been?

<li>Is tension control with such a small camera important (this matters a lot with bigger ones but I thought it might not with a Leica M)

</ul>

Cost isn't much of an issue (I have found that if there is one thing money should be spent on in photography it is in getting a great tripod). Any recommendations or good/bad experiences shared are greatly appreciated.

 

<p>

 

Thanks,

 

<p>

 

Matthew

Wow, I didn't expect so many responses this quickly. This discussion

board really is alive. To bill, yes, you are being the little devil

on my shoulder... however, since I really want the noctilux some day,

i don't think it would make sense to get the 50/1.4... but it sure

would be nice (mental note, lock up credit cards)...

 

<p>

 

Just so you know I am going to buy new from Delta International (most

likely). The prices I will be dealing with are as follows (much less

than B&H - but still bloddy expensive).

 

<p>

 

Leica M-6 "TTL" black 10436 high mag-$1548.00

 

<p>

 

Leica M-6 TTL (0.58) black 10475-$1548.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 35 1.4 M 11874 asph. (black)-$1685.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 35 f/2 M 11879 asph. (black)-$1113.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 50 f/2 M 11826 (black)-$742.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 50 1.0 M 11822 -$2014.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 50 1.4 M 11868-$1378.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 90 f/2 M 11884 asph.-$1445.00

 

<p>

 

Leica 90 2.8 M 11807 -$927.00

 

<p>

 

 

So, a 35/2 and 90/2 are $2558, and a 35/1.4 and 90/2.8 costs $2612 -

which is quite similar in price. As a side note, i have a Ricoh GR-1

which has a superb 28mm/2.8 and will be getting a minilux with a

40mm/2.4... just in case this would have any bearing on your

recommendations. This camera will be traveling around the world with

me (well okay, 'only' to central america, africa and europe) when I

leave in a little less than a month (yes i will run film through this

camera before hand - at least 20-30 rolls worth).

Okay, i give up. I'm getting an M system. I know it will cost a fortune, but as you know, once you have fondled one you don't want to let go.

<p>

So, here are my options for my first 3 lenses (one will be a 50/2). I am having trouble deciding between the other two, either a 35/1.4 and 90/2.8 or a 35/2 and a 90/2. I am a big fan of available light photography, but loose a stop with either combo. The Noctilux will be added in the future. Which option do you think I should go for?

 

Thanks for your suggestions.

Well, I would probably say bring a point and shoot - or any other gear you can fall down with and not cry all the way down the hill while hoping you didn't break your equipment. If you are rich, take it all and don't worry about... that would mean that you would have to be RICH. Make sure your gear isn't going to break you if you fall - i.e. if you have a medium format gear strapped to your chest and you do a nose dive, that could really hurt your chest. If you are like the rest of us mortals and not able to risk such expensive equipment in a blatantly dangerous way I think a point and shoot would be the best for the slopes (especially if you are not an accomplished snowboarder - snowboarders tend to fall more frequently than skiers anyways - its part of the game - a skier that is unaccomplished may be able to snow plow down the whole hill with their gear and be relatively certain they wouldn't fall - this doesn't work for snowboarders) - the mountains there are much like big beautiful mountains everywhere else - so if you want to take a lift up, then take some pictures from the top (without your snowboard attached to your feet) - then take the lift down again a medium format camera would be nice for scenic shots. Chances are it wouldn't be too nice for action jump shots - where the shutter lag on an SLR (and the speed of the motor drive) would make it the better option - once again, i would take the lift up, and stay up there or hike down the side of the hill with your gear - its safer for your gear as well as yourself.