[Leica] Re: R state-of-the art?

[Ben <ben@teco.net>]

>Here's an example.  My son is walking around in my backyard.  With an F5 or
>EOS1n (with Custom Function 4 On), I must point a sensor right at the
>portion of my son that I want in focus.  I must then recompose -- this is
>the key. 

Why recompose? Why not compose and point the sensor at the boy
simultaneously?

> Nikon would
>argue that I could first select the appropriate sensor, say the left one,
>then just fire away.  An equally good argument is that it is easier, better,
>more intuitive to constantly alter the composition as my son moves, focusing
>simultaneously.  With a manual camera, this is very natural.  It is simply
>not possible with an AF camera (in AF mode) to do this -- the focus points
>will dictate and influence the composition to some degree. 

On an EOS-1n you (optionally) move the back dial to choose focus points.
Any person capable of manually focusing must have sufficient dexterity
to move a dial to keep a spot on a boy. If the human machine is capable
of getting 1,000,000 points on PacMan it must be a non-issue to move a
dial to keep a spot on a subject. Of course you can use eye control on
the other EOS cameras which is easier still.

> If I want to be
>in complete control of composition at all times, I must be manually
>focusing.  An F5 will manually focus, but you have to first flip a switch on
>the lens to do so -- this takes time, 

On the F5 yes. On EOS no. I won't excuse Nikon for not catching up on
this either.

>and more importantly, attention away
>from the composition and the subject.  And once you have made the switch,
>the manual focus is not as good as with an R8.  Why?  Well, the R8
>viewfinder is brighter and the lens has better tactile feel. 

Well all the expensive EOS lenses I've used have a beautiful tactile
feel. Whether it is as good as the Leica ones you are thinking of I
don't know. But you can't compare expensive Leica lenses to cheap Canon
ones. As for the viewfinder, well either user can pick a focusing screen
that makes them happy, but a Canon user could... for example... buy a
24/1.4 giving a 2 stop brighter image than a Leica user with their more
expensive 24/2.8, not to mention easier manual focus with the faster
lens.

>This is great, but there is a reason that over many
>years SLR manufacturers standardized on a shutter dial on top of the camera
>and an aperture ring right behind the focus ring.  My Nikkormat wasn't this
>way, and it was a great camera, but most manufacturers moved in the
>"standard" direction over time, with a few exceptions.  The reason is that,
>over many years, this is what proved to be best.

No, the reason was that this was convenient from a manufacturing point
of view. When cameras are mostly mechanical you obviously need the
aperture control near the aperture itself. When they are electronic, it
doesn't matter anymore.

>Nikon and Canon are at the cutting edge of major change.  Technology is
>driving change at such a rapid rate that ergonomics will suffer to some
>degree in the transition.  The old way IS an old way, but it is time tested
>and damn good for many photographic applications.  Sports, power boats, and
>birds in flight are another story maybe, but for many applications, the
>manual approach can really work.  A skilled, experienced photographer can
>get VERY good at manipulating the camera intuitively.  With the options on
>an F5, you've got to be thinking about how the camera is set.  You have to
>aware of this at all times.  You don't want to get caught with your pants
>down with the wrong option set when the news breaks.

First you say an experienced photographer can get very good at using it
intuitively. But then you seem to imply that a skilled photographer
can't use the newer fancy features intuitively.

Take automatic exposure for example. I'm always finding that I'm
somewhere - like the beach - and a cloud will roll overhead reducing
exposure 2 stops, then it will disappear. Then another will come over.
Eventually I spend more time looking for clouds than shooting. Checking
exposure every 2 seconds. If it is off, find something 18% grey (nothing
much on the beach is 18% grey) and re-calibrating.

With auto-exposure I just find the right exposure compensation first
off. I then use centre weighted metering (spot is too dangerous. I could
inadvertantly put the spot on something of different reflectance to the
general scene) and shoot away for hours. So I NEEDED the multiple
exposure modes and I NEEDED the multiple metering modes, and yes I do
need to make sure I am using the right modes or it won't work.

>One more things, I like the Matrix meter on the F5, but it makes mistakes,
>constantly.  It can't know what's out there or what our intentions are. 
>When you don't have time it's better than screwing up manually, but when you
>have just a little time, it is generally better to let our brains take over.>

Sure, but there _are_ so many times when we don't have time to figure it
out. That's why I'd like to see Leica catch up on the technology.