jamie_robertson2

<p>I would avoid the 17mm f/2.8. It doesn't offer much over the kit zoom. The image quality is only adequate. </p> <p>The Panny 20mm f/1.7 offers the best value for money. It's a very sharp lens, very compact and has a nice wide aperture. If you must have a 17mm lens then the Oly 17mm f/1.8 is the best but it's considerably more expensive.</p>

<blockquote> <p> I'm looking to upgrade to a Olympus EM-5 and there are to many bodies to choose from.</p> </blockquote> <p>There are only two to choose from... the OMD E-M5 and the OMD E-M5 MkII.</p>

<p>I would avoid the modern Rodinal replacement (R09). It is nowhere near as good as the old stuff. The shelf life is poor.</p>

<blockquote> <p>The <strong>RT</strong> means Real-Time.<br />Beyond it's viewing & vibration advantages, it's main benefit was to have virtually instantaneous release with faster than normal frames per second.<br> Unfortunately <em><strong>Jamie R.</strong></em>, the fact that the EOS RT has only two drive modes: "Single Frame" & "Continuous", means that there's <strong>no "silent" </strong>mode.<br />So your motor drive's noise is part of the picture taking action; hardly considered discreet and quite...</p> </blockquote> <p>I know all that. But having no mirror makes it noticeably quieter than most 35mm SLRs with motor drive in my opinion.</p>

<blockquote> <p>@Jamie - you have inspired me. If I can get a shot half as good as yours, I'll be happy. Well done!</p> </blockquote> <p>Thanks Hosteen. The incredible architecture of the Royal Albert Hall in London owes more to the shot than my skills :-)</p> <p>Here's a shot of a more normal subject...</p><div></div>

<p>Good choice. It's an incredible lens for the money. </p><div></div>

<blockquote> <p>Does the half-case cover the battery slot? If so, that presents a problem, considering the short charge life of an A7 battery.</p> </blockquote> <p>I have a half case on my Leica M6 TTL and I have to remove it after every 36 shots. A7 users have it good :-)</p>

<p>Why not use a Canon EOS RT? No mirror to slap around.</p> <p>Out of the SLRs, the EOS 30 is the quietest and most refined 35mm SLR camera I have ever heard. </p>

<p>I would go for 3:45.</p>

<p>Wow, that's really an incredible price. Even taking into account international shipping and import tax, it's still a bargain for UK buyers too. Thanks :-) </p>

<p>The 550EX should work with the EOS 3 perfectly. </p>

<p>All Canon & Nikon need to do at some point is to remove the mirror and put in an EVF instead of the traditional optical viewfinder. That is what will happen soon. There's no point shrinking the size of the Canon and Nikon cameras because the larger pro bodies handle better anyway, especially with the larger pro lenses. Sony is doing all the hard work and innovation at the moment. Canon & Nikon will just wait until the EVF tech is perfected and then jump in with both feet. If they can do that whilst maintaining the same standard of tracking AF then the Sony cameras will remain compact cameras for enthusiasts only. </p>

<p>Take the lens cap off ;-)</p>

<p>The Canon 5D2 had a similar, less obvious, problem when it was first released. A firmware update soon cured it.</p>

<p>I agree Don. It was a big shock but I am looking forward to getting back to shooting with it without worry for another 20 years hopefully :-)</p>

<p>Here's what Leica told me the camera needed to correct the faulty meter and shutter brake. I can't see what the rangefinder has to do with it.:<br> <br> <em>Clean and relubr. shutter adjust shutter brake replace light sealing clean/adjust micro switch adjustment of shutter times adjust exposure meter adjust autocollimation adjust friction </em><br> <em>adjust range finder clean range finder</em></p> <p><em>adjustment of all parts</em></p> <p><em>cleaning and end control </em><br> <em>Necessary materials </em><br> <em>leather covering</em></p>

<blockquote> <p>It would make sense for Canon (or Nikon) to keep their present footprint, but remove the mirror and replace it with an high quality (read, high resolution, 4 MP or more) electronic viewfinder.</p> </blockquote> <p>+1</p> <p>Exactly! I've been saying that for years. Mirrorless is not all about size, it's about the EVF and the many advantages it can bring. I'm sure pros would rather shoot with a supremely handling mirrorless version of a Canon 5DsR with its vast array of lenses than a fiddly Sony A7. </p> <p>Full frame mirrorless cams like the A7 still need big lenses. Just look at the new Leica SL, it's enormous with it's "kit" lens attached! Why suffer with a small fiddly body when you have huge lenses anyway?</p> <p>As soon as the retro styling appeal of the mirrorless offerings get's tired I think we'll see Canon and Nikon pulling out the mirrors and installing EVFs in their DSLR cameras. </p>

<p>Thanks Arthur,</p> <p>I must admit that I am very much looking forward to shooting with it again. It's been a miss :-)</p>

<blockquote> <p>Didn't they send you a cost estimate beforehand?</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes.</p> <p>Arthur, I initially sent the camera to Malcolm Taylor here in the UK. He is regarded as being one of the best in the business over here. He tried everything to identify and correct the problem but eventually concluded that the meter circuit itself needed reprogramming, something that apparently only Leica can do.</p>

<p>Thanks, I suppose I'll have to continue trawling the web for samples :-)</p>

<p>Not a question, just a statement. </p> <p>I have just been charged €928.53 ($1020) by Leica in Germany for repairing the meter and shutter brake on my M6 TTL.</p> <p>I initially tried to get the meter repaired by a good 3rd party technician but, apparently, the meter fault can only be cured by connecting the camera to one of Leica's computers.</p> <p>Obviously I would not normally have paid such an amount but the camera has great sentimental value and I will at least know that the camera will be as good as new when I get it back. The camera was otherwise in absolutely mint condition.</p> <p>Just take this as a warning if any of you ever consider sending a camera to Leica for maintenance!</p>

<p>Just wondered if it works well out in the field. Obviously there will need to be no movement at all (e.g. swaying trees and grasses etc). Anyone?</p>

<p>The only reason I can't ever see myself switching to m43 is the depth of field issue. That's never going to go away. I adore the m43 system but I shoot wide open regularly with a 35mm f1.4 lens on full frame and m43 just cannot replicate that. It's two systems for me.</p>

<p>Robin,</p> <p>I could only envisage it being a moderate success if it had a very high resolution sensor, circa 50MP. Pros might then be tempted as the resolution would take max advantage of the Leica glass. Anyway, that's just my opinion. </p>

<blockquote> <p>The M mount doesn't have sufficient electronic interface to do auto focus.</p> </blockquote> <p>I still don't understand. The Nikon F mount was in the same boat until they added electronics for autofocus.</p> <blockquote> <p>You keep saying the price is stupid because if you said so then all Leica prices are stupid.</p> </blockquote> <p>All Leica prices are <strong>not</strong> stupid, that's my point. For example, the Leica Q price is actually quite reasonable. You get a complete full frame camera including a 35mm Summilux lens for LESS than the price of a 35mm Summilux on its own. In comparison, the SL price really is stupid.</p>