ewanc

July 1, 2009

Michael, battery drain happens quite often to me because I usually forget to switch back to B/OFF after putting it back into the case.

Of course, I am not saying that it would apply to Justin's experience. It might be that, or bad batteries, or something else.

But I am glad to hear that cleaning the thumb cap (="battery compartment" in my words) worked for you, as it worked for me. By the way, how do you clean your thumb cap? Do you use alcohol as well?

June 29, 2009

The two problems may be isolated. In my case, the first problem of MP eating through the batteries quickly was caused by putting the camera in a tight case or bag where the shutter may be depressed by movement of the bag or case during carry, causing battery drain if the dial is not in the B/Off position (and the shutter is cocked.) Does this ring a bell Justin?

I have also encountered the second problem. If you know the batteries are still good, check the inside of the battery compartment for battery residue stuck to the base. A few times my meter worked again after I had scraped off the white, dust like residue with a small "minus" screwdriver off the base of the battery compartment. To this day, I am still not sure whether that was really the cause of the problem, but for some reason it worked.

Did anyone here ever have the same problem with battery residue like me?

January 15, 2009

Nikon F3 and the AI-S Nikkor 35mm 1.4 as your first lens would be my recommendation.

The F3 finder is wonderful. Oh and the silky feel of that film advance lever.

Not sure what that combo would cost nowadays, but if too much then Nikon FM3a and AI-S Nikkor 50mm 1.8 would make a fine outfit as well.

October 9, 2008

I am not sure whether he uses flash, but on Kodak's webpage he is quoted to say the following:

“Tri-X supports a lot of light. Even when I overexpose it delivers truly beautiful tones.”

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw/triX2.jhtml

So maybe overexposing is a technique he uses often?

September 30, 2008

To MP or not to MP?

In dollar terms,

a difference of 2 or 3 grand,

yet would that account for,

a difference in class?

There's something about MP,

a subtle, classic grace,

missing from those flamboyant cousins,

who like to say

"Hiya! I am a Leica M6."

Some may even add, loudly,

"I am a TTL."

And they'll all be showing off the red dot dress.

Attention getters!

Not so the MP.

If MP were a woman,

she might be Grace Kelly.

Her understated elegance,

puts the subject at ease.

Some might even guess, she's a Vogltlander or Ikon...

a non VIP.

Let the silly ones wonder.

In the meantime, the shutter clicks,

we capture their puzzlement,

in the most natural form.

What's 4 grand anyway?

With APPL stocks, you'd get about 40 today;

and it might not even hold value,

like the MP may.

Anyway, since you had to ask,

I'd probably say

M6

Then again, since you had to ask,

I'd also say

MP.

January 31, 2008

I surely get mildly annoyed when I see too many R related threads in the Leica *and* Rangefinders forum... (just joking OK!) But seriously, what about the digital P&S made by Leica? Surely they are Leica cameras, which is OK to discuss them, but then they are digital P&S, which is not OK according to Tony's post. Now if we allow people to discuss Leica digital P&S, then people with Panasonic digital P&S (as some Leicas P&S are essentially rebadged Panas or vice versa?) would say why not let them discuss their cameras here too. And then the rest of the digital P&S crowd would argue the same.

What to do?

January 10, 2008

Read the following dialogue and answer the multiple choice:

Young Doc: No wonder this circuit failed. It says "Made in Japan".

Marty McFly: What do you mean, Doc? All the best stuff is made in Japan.

Young Doc: Unbelievable.

Are Young Doc and Marty McFly talking about:

<ol>

<li>stereotypes?</li>

<li>shifting perceptions over time?</li>

<li>different things altogether?</li>

<li>all of the above?</li>

<li>none of the above?</li>

</ol>

January 8, 2008

Just for the heck of it, let's look at it from a purely financial standpoint, using historical Leica M6 prices as a guide. I have found some sources from the web re: M6 prices but have no idea if they are accurate or not. Anyway, here goes: (all figures $USD)

In 1984, a brand new Leica M6 (Wetzlar) cost about $600, according to this site <a href="http://pic1.piczo.com/urbanphotos/?g=1518734">

http://pic1.piczo.com/urbanphotos/?g=1518734

</a>

Converted into today's dollars (2008) using this site <a href="

http://www.1soft.com/todaysdollars.htm">

http://www.1soft.com/todaysdollars.htm

</a>

that's about $1044.23.

Today M6 Wetzlars in good condition routinely go for more than $1300.

So what that means is that if you had bought an M6 in 1984 and kept it in good condition, you would probably make more than $250 (in today's dollars), but in absolute terms, about $700. Not bad for a camera.

In conclusion, I think yes, you are making a wrong decision from a financial standpoint. If you are really fixated on the Nikon D3, I would suggest holding on to your M7 and 50mm for a few more years and then sell it to buy a mint D3 when the D4 comes out. M7 should hold its value while D3 drops, and you make money from the switch a few years down the road, not losing money as you do now. Meanwhile you will enjoy shooting with the M7 - that is, after all the point with these things - before you relinquish that joy to that do-it-all Nikon behemonth.

January 5, 2008

Five months ago I decided to get my first M and you can read why I decided to get an M6 and 35mm'Lux <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MTsT">here</a>.

If you are interested in the 35mm'Lux you can also read about the followup adventure <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MXSS">here.</a>

Good luck!

January 1, 2008

Do I buy a Leica Rangefinder (I could afford an MP with one lens for the moment!) or a Nikon system with three modern AIS lenses maybe a 20mm 35mm and 55mm micro?

I am not being sarcastic here, but you may have already given the answer to your question... in your question. If you really have the intention or need to shoot very wide as well as close-up subjects given your own references to the 20mm and 55mm micro lenses, then the choice is really Nikon. It is possible to shoot with ultra-wides (FL 20mm or less) lenses on the Leica M of course, but you will need to add an external finder for more accurate framing which in my humble opinion defeats the purpose of owning a small discreet rangefinder. As for macro-photography, there are simply more lens/accessory options in the Nikon system than the Leica M.

October 28, 2007

The answer to your question is either a 35 or 50 Cron. These are priced reasonably in the used Leica market, and are fast enough for most people. You will need to pick whether you want a normal 50 or a wider 35. If you use your R8's 35-70 zoom often enough, ask yourself whether you tend to shoot close to 35 or 50 and there is your final answer.

On the other hand, another factor to consider is if you have a M6 TTL 0.58 or 0.72 viewfinder, I would mate it with a 35mm lens for obvious framing advantages; if you have a 0.85, I would mate it with a 50mm for ease of focusing. But I would only consider picking my first lens in such a way if I cannot decide between the 35 and 50. (For me, when I bought my M6, it was clear to me that my first lens would be a 35.)

October 26, 2007

Hello,

Looks like you just answered your own question... "I don't care the ttl falsh (sic)".

The M6 classic does not seem to be hard to find, in the US at least. There are a few on sale here:

http://www.classicconnection.com/Cameras,51,Products.asp

DISCLAIMER: I do not work for the outfit above and I am not recommending that you buy (or not buy) from him.

October 26, 2007

First, maybe instead of another camera you should get a marine housing. (Just joking!)

You should always bring at least two cameras to a wedding if you are the hired photographer. As Kurt above mentioned, backup is important as equipment can fail or mishaps could happen (as you well know).

Having said that, even when I am not hired to do weddings but just there shooting for fun, I would carry two bodies just so that I can put color film in one and B&W in another. I would do the same if shooting digital but for a different reason: don't want to miss an important shot due to lens change. I like to put a fast 35mm or a WA zoom 20-35 2.8 on one body, and a fast 50 on the other.

When shooting with two bodies with lenses of different focal lengths attached to them, I usually start shooting with the camera with the wider lens attached and the other I lug on my shoulder. And I tend to stick with one camera for a while because I often find momentum watching a shot develop given my anticipation of the scene, and changing cameras before I get the shot would destroy that momentum. However, I would switch instantly to the camera with the longer lens if I see a dramatically better shot: sometimes it could be crowds or obstacles keeping me too far away from the subject, or just better compositionally speaking with a longer lens.

Regards.

October 25, 2007

Is your client saying that some of the actual proofs are dark, or is she saying the photos are dark when viewing the CD on the computer?

From your post it sounds like she is complaining about the proofs, but in case it is the latter then you might want to take a look at any possible gamma issues relating to your monitor calibration (as well as your client's). If the gamma on your monitor (or your client's) is set incorrectly, then a lot of photos that have been processed by you on your computer may appear OK on your monitor, but dark on your client's monitor. This is especially a common problem for Mac users when their photos are viewed by others on PC monitors.

Now I am not saying this is indeed the cause of your problem, but if you have eliminated other causes and you are still stuck, this one is worth looking into. If necessary, do a search for "gamma calibration" on photo.net or google for more help.

October 19, 2007

Ricoh GX-100. Digital. Small. Pocketable. Versatile zoom lens from 24mm to 72mm (f/2.5-4.4). Snap focus mode very fast and great for quick candids. Excellent ergonomics for manual control. No optical viewfinder but an optional electronic viewfinder can be attached to simulate SLR style shooting. 4.5W x 2.3H x 0.98D inches, 8.8 oz incl. battery.

October 16, 2007

Not sure if you are buying online or not, but in case you didn't get a chance to hold and check the condition of the camera and lens, Gandy of cameraquest.com fame has a pretty good checklist here that you can try on your M6 when it arrives.

<a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/leicamchecklist.htm">http://www.cameraquest.com/leicamchecklist.htm</a>

Sorry if this is old news to you and welcome to the wonderful world of M.

October 10, 2007

The 12504 lens shade takes "Series 7" filters.

B&H sells B+W Series 7 yellow filters <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&sb=bs%2Cupper%28ds%29&sq=asc&ac=&bsi=&shs=&ci=113&at=Brand_B%2BW&at=Color_Yellow&at=Size_Series+7">here</a>.

October 10, 2007

If you can find a classic camera shop selling used gear in D.C., there is a good chance you may be able to fondle (ahem, I mean handle) both cameras.

I was sort of in your shoes a few months ago and I actually dreamt about the M6 in my sleep, but it was only when I could hold the camera at a store that I could decide. You might be interested in my tale <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MTsT">here</a>.

Regards.

October 9, 2007

I'll answer the third question first: 0.72 mag is great for 35mm and 50mm, although if you wear glasses you might also consider 0.58 for those two focal lengths. Also, some older versions of 35mm lux and crons with rounded hoods attached will definitely obstruct the lower right corner of the viewfinder; and I am guessing that it would be the same for 50mm with rounded hood versions. (But take off the hood and you should be ok.)

As for whether to buy this or that...? I feel that Frank does have a point. Since you are not sure whether you need the extra stop of the lux or not, maybe it's good that you stick with the M7 starter's kit, as that remains the cheapest way to go M brand new. Later you can modify your kit according to your needs that arises.

October 2, 2007

Joel: thanks! It's good to know that early M6 classics circuit boards may tank any moment now. (Just wish I had known before I got mine just recently.) Anyway, how much does Sherry charge doing the circuit board replacement?

October 1, 2007

When talking about Leica M6 eye-relief for the bespectacled user we also need to specify which viewfinder magnification - 0.58, 0.72 or 0.85 - to buy. (The VF for each Leica M6 sold is fixed to one of the above.) I wear glasses, and my personal experience with the 0.72 is that I can barely see the entire frame when a 35mm lens is used. I definitely have trouble seeing the entire frame when a 28mm is mounted (just by previewing using the frameline selector) unless I shift the position of my eye around a lot. But since I intend to purchase a 50mm in the future, the 0.72 is probably better for me than the 0.58.

The quick rule re: which M6 body to purchase seems to be this:

<ul>

<li>0.58 is great if you wear glasses and/or 28mm is your mainstay lens; focusing accuracy is not as good as the 0.72 and 0.85 however.</li>

<li>0.72 is the middle of the road; get this if you plan to use mostly 35mm and 50mm lenses with great focusing accuracy.</li>

<li>0.85 is for those who want to have more focusing accuracy than a 0.72; if you use 50mm-135mm as your main lens on this body, you'd focus more accurately with a 0.85. But this body has no frameline support for 28mm lens.</li>

</ul>

Regards.

September 28, 2007

Thank you all very much for your contributions, since knowing what it is and how to avoid it is important to me. I am deeply humbled by how knowledgeable some of you are on optics, and only wish I had paid more attention to my physics class back when I was still a student.

Samuel: I found an example taken recently that may exhibit what you suggested re: "how a spherical aberration becomes dramatically worse as image height increases?" Here is the photo, taken, at f1.4 with the 35'Lux. The light sources are a little higher than the original photo that began this post, and the coma effect seems to be a bit more pronounced as well. Also notice how the coma is more angled as it deviates more from the center. Regards.

</a>

Coma Example

Leica M6 + 35'Lux

September 27, 2007

Late to the party, but anyway here is another example.

</a>

Portrait of K.G.

Leica M6 + 35'Lux (pre-ASPH)

September 27, 2007

<h2>Good Design</h2>

<h3>Story of a Leica newbie with his M6 and 35 Summilux.</h3>

(Part 3 in a series. Also see <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MTsT">Part 1</a> and <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MXSS">Part 2</a>.)

</a>

Pebbles and Stones

Leica M6

Ten Principles of Good Design

<ol>

<li>Good design is innovative.</li>

<li>Good design makes a product useful.</li>

<li>Good design is aesthetic.</li>

<li>Good design helps us to understand a product.</li>

<li>Good design is unobtrusive.</li>

<li>Good design is honest.</li>

<li>Good design is durable.</li>

<li>Good design is consequent to the last detail.</li>

<li>Good design is concerned with the environment.</li>

<li>Good design is as little design as possible.</li>

</ol>

Back to purity, back to simplicity.

-- Dieter Rams, renowned German designer

Let's be clear on one thing: my buying a Leica M6 and a 35'Lux (pre-ASPH) had

nothing to do with being nostalgic about film, film cameras or the Leica brand

itself.

If there is one word that sums up the reason for the purchase, it would be design.

In every aspect of the word "design", the M6 and the 35'Lux are close to

perfect: whether we are talking about aesthetics, or ergonomics, or philosophy.

Pick one up. Hold in it your hands. Admire the lines of the M6 body and the

clean, uncluttered top. Notice how the face of the shutter dial and of the film

advance lever form a straight line with the raised portion of the top plate to

maintain a largely rectangular profile. The hot shoe is cleverly recessed behind

the raised portion of the plate, preserving the lines of the camera top.

With the exception of the viewfinder, rangefinder and frameline illumination

windows on the front side of the top plate, most of the shapes found on the M6

body are rounded. The placement of the various levers, lens release button and

battery chamber form a very pleasing façade to the eye.

The size of the M6 with 35'Lux attached is another perfection to behold. After

mounting, the dimunitive 35'Lux, sans hood, juts out a paltry 3cm from the

mount. The lens and the body strike an aesthetic balance of minute proportions:

that small is, indeed, beautiful, and the advantage of such compactness with

this particular configuration should immediately convince one that taking the

camera out is never a heavy chore, nor an obtrusive one. The M6 returns to the

classic dimensions that began with the M3, for when the M5 designers tampered

with perfection, it almost killed the company.

Cool to the touch, the metal-bodied M6 feels solid, and the same goes for the

35'Lux. And judging by the wealth of "I inherited a Leica M from ..." threads on

the net, these tools were created to last more than a few years, unlike many

objects created by manufacturing practices today that favors lower cost and

cheaper materials at the expense of durability.

If I were only a collector, I would have ended this post here. Alas, I take

pictures with my cameras.

Set the shutter speed on the shutter dial, twist the aperture ring on the lens

to set the f-stop, and finally move the well-dampened focus lever to focus.

Then, click on the shutter release. Repeat. (The lack of bells and whistles

means that distractions are few. Exception: you could play with the frameline

preview lever until you get bored.)

The readouts for the three essential settings (aperture, shutter and focus) will

always be found at the same places and that's where you adjust them as well. The

clean design of both the body and the lens allow the various readouts to be

verified quickly. The camera has no hidden agenda; it's honest to you.

The M6 has a built-in meter to guide you, but even with that information you are

on your own. The lack of AE mode means you must ultimately decide how you want

to make your picture.

What that means is the tool puts the photographer in total control, and echoes

what Dieter Rams says in the last sentence of his good design principles:

"Back to purity". Why? Because when one can make a picture the way he visualized

it without interference from a superbly designed camera, that's purity.

The other half of Rams' last sentence is "back to simplicity". All Leica M

versions are good examples of minimalistic design, but those Leica Ms with

mechanical shutters reflect the elegance of emotional simplicity in terms of the

non-AE feature set as well as the freedom from dependence on batteries to get a

picture taken. (A bit of subjective interpretation on my part, to be sure.)

In conclusion of this post, may I quote what Mark Amos, a photo.net member,

wrote recently about the Leica M:

Really good designs provide solutions to needs, but some designs are so good,

intuitive, and inspired by an understanding of the human interface that they

actually compel us to adapt to the features of the design because the visionary

creator gives us something extra or even teaches us through the creation.

Architecture can be like this. Great architecture doesn't simply "function": it

inspires, and often it asks us to be open-minded to what it offers for the value

and insight that went into the creation even if it presents something beyond the

parameters.

I don't think I could put it better than that.

Oh, and allow me to correct myself. There is indeed nostalgia associated with my

M6 purchase: nostalgia with good design.

</a>

Doors, Exhausts and Wires

Leica M6

P.S. What I said here about the M6 can probably be applied to the MP, as well as

the M3, M2 and M4 if you exclude the part about the meter.

P.P.S. Some may consider me silly by not even mentioning perhaps one of the best

reasons to own a Leica M: the quality of the optics. That Leica glow. Given

two systems: one of great design and normal optics or one of normal design and

great optics, I might still pick the former. But thankfully, with the Leica M

system we don't need to make such a choice, do we?

September 17, 2007

Welcome to the Leica newbie club. I bought my early black M6 more than a month ago and the lens I eventually settled on was a 35mm Summilux (pre-ASPH). You can check my version of the newbie tales in "Leica Adventure" category of the photo.net forum.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by ewanc