jbm

<p>Kool shot there, Ben. I would say you are off to a great start. My ultimate goal, unbeknownst to wifey, is convering part of the basement into a darkroom. I also put my name on the waiting list for the new Voigtlander/Fuji collapsible 6x7 RF due out next spring. Yeeeehaaaa!</p>

<p>Cheers<</p>

<p>Jay</p>

<p>Matt,<br>

As ever, great insight and great photos. I do enjoy a bit of the film. I will say one thing: I shot some rolls of low ISO film with a Mamiya 7...those negatives scanned large are simply magnificent. I will shoot some more interesting MF and get around to posting them. But scanned at 6800 dpi, I can easily upres a bit and get to 40x50", I think and can make some serious prints! I cannot do that on my D300.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p>

<p>Hey Chris,<br>

Funny, I find the CL to be hefty for its size, which I guess shows I hve spent not realy time with a Leica M!<br>

I overexposed a lot of the photos by about a stop or just under that, but the one of my Dad was really close to spot on. I would just take a reading of the face as a midtone figuring caucasian skin is a little darker than white but a little lighter than a true midtone (in my dad's case, anyway). So I would set the skin dead even then get the meter a stop under that and hope for the best. Could I have stretched that answer out any longer? Easier: I intentionally had to underexpose from the spot reading of Dad's face by a stop.<br>

Is there a website I can use to find the soft release?<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p>

<p>Grazi, Vincenzo.</p>

<p>Howard, I appreciate the offer. I love the D300 and it will continued to get a lot of use. The CL is not the best sports camera, I cannot use a 200 mm portrait lens on it, and it is not the best for super wide angle photography. Also, with the Nikon CLS and some speedlights, I can shoot anywhere on any street and get amaxing fashion photos out of it. So, for now, at leaset, I will hold onto the Nikon.<br>

Should circumstance change and I find myself not shooting digital at all, I will certainly keep your offer in mind and you get frist dibs! ;-)<br>

Thanks for looking, everybody!<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p>

<p>Ooops, sorry abou the double post. I didn't realize the first one went through as my browser gave a giant error message...sorry. Off to bed!<br>

8 more rolls to return to me on Saturday!<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p>

<p>Ben, the CL is quite small...I carry it when I go running now in one hand, dog leashes in the other. I attach it to my wrist via a strap and hold it with my very small hands without a problem. The Summi 40 is a very small lens, and the package has just the right amount of heft. It feels perfect, just plain old perfect.<br>

Doug, the problem is that I am shooting medium format again, as well, otherwise the Nikon would be great. The 9000 is a great scanner but costs 2200 bucks...the 750 is able to do large format, as well. If I was only doing 35mm I would go with the Nikon 5000. I actually just got negatives and transparencies back from a week spent with a Mamiya 7 (Mamiya 7 + Velvia 100 = HOLY GUACAMOLE). They are outrageous. One other thing...I have seen some absolutely stunning scans from an inexpensive PlusTek scanner, but it's Dmax limits shadow detail a bit. Still it scans at a very high resolution for a couple of hundred bucks.<br>

I am bummed to hear you had bad luck with the Epson. Mostly I've heard positive responses. Maybe I should get a Nikon for 35 and MF and then a good flatbed for LF. We'll see.<br>

These scans are the "proof scans" from my lab. They are crap scans...there is dust all over the negatives and they are very low resolution. Still I am pleased with the initial quality of the images from the CL. Scanned well with low ISO film, I see no reason not to up interpolate and make great 20x30 prints.<br>

There are several shots I took wide open and they are actually pretty sharp and it was easy to focus. Or else I got lucky. Who cares...it worked!<br>

I will post more when I get a chance.<br>

Thanks to everyone for their advice with the camera and the spot meter. I am thrilled to be learning about another facet of photography with a great new group of people.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p><div></div>

<p>Ben, the CL is quite small...I carry it when I go running now in one hand, dog leashes in the other. I attach it to my wrist via a strap and hold it with my very small hands without a problem. The Summi 40 is a very small lens, and the package has just the right amount of heft. It feels perfect, just plain old perfect.<br>

Doug, the problem is that I am shooting medium format again, as well, otherwise the Nikon would be great. The 9000 is a great scanner but costs 2200 bucks...the 750 is able to do large format, as well. If I was only doing 35mm I would go with the Nikon 5000. I actually just got negatives and transparencies back from a week spent with a Mamiya 7 (Mamiya 7 + Velvia 100 = HOLY GUACAMOLE). They are outrageous. One other thing...I have seen some absolutely stunning scans from an inexpensive PlusTek scanner, but it's Dmax limits shadow detail a bit. Still it scans at a very high resolution for a couple of hundred bucks.<br>

I am bummed to hear you had bad luck with the Epson. Mostly I've heard positive responses. Maybe I should get a Nikon for 35 and MF and then a good flatbed for LF. We'll see.<br>

These scans are the "proof scans" from my lab. They are crap scans...there is dust all over the negatives and they are very low resolution. Still I am pleased with the initial quality of the images from the CL. Scanned well with low ISO film, I see no reason not to up interpolate and make great 20x30 prints.<br>

There are several shots I took wide open and they are actually pretty sharp and it was easy to focus. Or else I got lucky. Who cares...it worked!<br>

I will post more when I get a chance.<br>

Thanks to everyone for their advice with the camera and the spot meter. I am thrilled to be learning about another facet of photography with a great new group of people.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jay</p><div></div>

<p>This was my very first shot with the CL...save for the two clicks I made in the store without really knowing what I was doing (one happens to be a nice portrait of the chap that sold me the camera). I took this on the loading dock of EP Levine Photo on the way out.</p><div></div>

<p>This is the window in our kitchen looking out into the neighbor's yard...</p><div></div>

<p>My living room. I have no reason to like this shot as much as I do except it came out of my baby Leica. If I have a daughter, I am naming her Leica...</p><div></div>

<p>This is a tree at the end of my street. It is underneath a streetlight which causes intense flare that looks like the surface of the moon. It happens with every camera I own...</p><div></div>

<p>Taken on a walk out to Ram's Pasture on Nantucket Island. The lab lost my scanned CD's from the rest of this day...but there are at least 10 keepers on it. I know from the tiny proofs they include. Can't wait to see that Ilford 100 shine!</p><div></div>

<p>The tree outside our place before I got in the car for Thankgiving...</p><div></div>

<p>Took this while wifey was driving...god bless her for putting up with me...</p><div></div>

<p>Well, I have to admit I was actually nervous to see that I might get out of my new Leica CL. I enjoyed shooting it but shot a bit more than maybe I should have without getting the results back to correct any mistakes. I didn't have to worry...I took somedecent pictures, the spot meter (and everybody's advice as to how to use it), worked just fine and I got many, many more keepers per trip of the shutter than I get with my D300 (which I still love...it takes just outrageously good photos...but this is different).<br>

It's amazing how much the return to film brings me back to the older, different satisfaction I took from photography when I was younger with my Dad's F3. I think a little more, shoot a little less, and really enjoy the process. I looooove digital, but it's like comparing apples and toasters.<br>

I would say I am a convert and will be using the Leica very regularly now. Next step is a scanner...either a Nikon or the Epson V750...the scanning costs are going to get steep!<br /> Cheers,<br /> Jay</p><div></div>

Rob and others...

 

Thanks for the advice. I think the best shots...which I will attempt to post once I get high res scans and mess with them a bit...would all be appropriately exposed using any of the techniques above.

 

I was just reading the debate surrounding the new Nikon D3x which is just an outrageous machine. By the end of the thread, all I could think is, man, I'd rather shoot with my Leica. I do love my D300 and it give amazing files, but the Leica reminds me a bit more of Obi Wan Kenobi's musings about the light saber:

 

"A more elegant weapon from a more civilized age."

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

Aloha again.

 

I was wondering if anyone could give me a quick explanation (or point me in the right direction) as to how to use the

spot meter in my Leica CL. I shot a bunch of rolls of film, some are reasonably well exposed, but I think that a lot if

it was luck. I have tried two different techniques. As is my M.O., I pulled them out of my arse with little to no

research. First, when shooting people, I would spot meter their skin and then overexpose by one stop, trying to

make normal caucasian skin correspond to roughly zone V.

 

The other technique I tried was taking a reading on the darkest tone in which I wanted to preserve shadow detail and

would then open up the exposure about 4 or five stops to try to get things evenly exposed.

 

Any advice or helpful links?

 

Thanks,

 

Jay

Well I have spent a few days shooting with the camera...now it's time to take the film to the lab and see what the heck I've done. I will post a few here when I get my results. Learning the rangefinder takes a bit but it sure is nice to slow down the pace a bit.

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

Hey y'all...after a year and a half of renewed photography addiction, I started to look at my dSLR and say swear

words. It makes amazing photos, but sometimes I wish it would get the heck out of the way and just let me take a

photograph.

 

So I bought a Leica CL. It is essentially untouched and has a new photocell in it. It has a German made

Summicron 40/2. I am about to take my first rolls to the lab.

 

I was just wondering if y'all had any advice for a new rangefinder user and any that might be specific to the CL. I

know there are supposed to be some lenses that might damage the camera.

 

Also, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the CL and see any photos taken with it and the Summi 40/2...there seems to

not be a ton of sample photos taken with it.

 

I hope all of you are having a great thanksgiving...I am working!

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

Per the post above...you don't need to think of a 5D, or any dSLR for that matter, as obselete. The 5D is to my way of thinking the best deal in digital today. You can pick up a full frame machine with reasonable AF and great image quality for 1800 bucks. In terms of output, it is as good as any other FF camera. Sure the LCD might not be as pretty, but if you are happy with the photos that come out of your camera now, you can be happy with them for many years to come.

I have to say this is an interesting thread. The technical discussion is interesting, sure, but it's even more

intriguing to see how rude people can be over something as trivial as the film vs digi debate. First, there are

plenty of responses from people who were simply uninformed or didn't take the time to apply their intellectual

horsepower toward understanding some basic math.

 

Mauro, I found your post interesting if a little difficult to understand at first. Essentially if you are

heading out and want to fire off a few landscape shots, preserve some more detail (and are planning to print

reasonably large), shooting 35mm film with digital conversion is not a terrible idea.

 

As someone who is about to start using 35 mm film (again), medium format film (again), and (gulp) large format

film and scanning, it reinforces the reasons I plan to do this. At some point in the future, contact printing

and wet lab work may be in my future and I hope there are still some rewards to be found there.

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

I think the 16-85 is not the best compromise for travel. Stopped down, it is tack, tack sharp, but you will want to use the tele length to capture things a little further away or for flattering portraits.

 

I went on a South African honeymoon (back in my Canon days) and took a crapola Tamron 18-200 with me. You can click my name and look at all of my wildlife photos and half of my photos of people. All were done with the Tamron, no VR. If I shot at night with really high ISO's, I made them into monochromes after removing the chroma noise first in PS and they look like Ilford really high speed film. Most of the color photos in good light are very, very passable for most uses (and the Nikon will be way better, lightyears, actually). Printed the photos look great...not exceptional like the stuff out of my 16-85 stopped down or a good prime, but there were a lot of shots I would have missed without the range.

 

Mayy Laur is rarely wrong. I agree would take the 18-200 and for another 120 bucks a 50/1.8 for low light and the occasional artistic shot where you want to make use of some bokeh. You'll come back with more photos and no regrets!

 

Of course this is all for giggles, I LOVE my 16-85 for knocking around town and if you get one you'll appreciate the wide end.

 

Happy shooting!

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

Check out www.magnuminmotion.com and take a look at Gilden's piece on foreclosures. It is tasteful and his approach to his subject different than that seen during the youtube clip in question.

 

This has been a pretty deep rabbit hole we've all fallen down...no?

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

Crop factor sensors will be around for a long time. There are scads of them being used, proprietary lenses (DX,

AF-S, 4/3), and, as stated, they keep the initial investment required for an entry level DSLR reasonable.

 

As far as resolution goes, they are unlikely to really improve much more by adding megapixels. Lenses can't

really resolve things a whole lot better than 12MP packed onto a crop factor lens. For this reason, the 50D is

not really a massive improvement in image quality over the 40D (looking at the lab tests done on dpreview.com and

imaging-resource.com). My hope is that the manufacturers start to pay attention to the image quality and leave

the megapixel race behind. I would love to see increases in dynamic range and better tonal response and

gradation in a 12MP camera. The ultimate would be a Canon X0D/Nikon DX00 that has 15 stops dynamic range

producing true 16-bit files. That is where there is room to improve the crop factor sensors.

 

Cheers,

 

Jay

(Happy owner of a D300 and formerly a Canon Digital Rebel XT guy...both amazing cameras)