Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/08/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Since I got my new R7, this week I experimented shooting models with it and the 100/2.8 only. I left my incident meter at the office, and tried all my favorite 100 speed films (Astia, E100S, Sensia II). (NOTE: BTW, I found that Astia is the most accurate in reproducing color, while E100S tints a warm, yellowish color, and Sensia II tints magenta.) For metering, I consistently spot metered off the model's face in M mode and either made her face Zone 5 (regardless of the ambient light), or increased exposure by 1/2 to 1 stop. I tried to keep shutter speeds over 1/250, but sometimes had to drop as low as f/2.8 @ 1/60 or so. In good light I was shooting at f/2.8 at 1/1000. I rated all my 100 speed films at 80, which I always do (better for scanning, and clears minor skin blemishes). I tried to focus as accurately as possible with the R7's bright screen. In the end, 80% of the slides looked great sitting on the lightbox, but upon examination with a loupe, I found unsharp faces when I swear I focused correctly and accurately on the model's eyes or brow. Any ideas as to why I got generally poor results? I mean, under a 4x loupe, almost every shot looked as though I had moved or not focused properly. I have gotten VERY sharp photos from my M6 using the same film and the same techniques. Could my R7 diopter setting be off? Could mirror slap be the culprit? Could it be slight bodily movement from caffeine and alcohol, meaning I need a tripod? (NOTE: I have done handheld model shoots with the M6, at sunset, at 1/60 or 1/125 and have gotten SUPER-sharp results. Maybe it's just the narrow DOF of the 100/2.8 wide open at 1-2.5 meters? Could the underrating of the film be contributing to the greater than normal prominance of grain? When you shoot a portrait with the R7 without an incident meter, do you guys meter from the face too, or is this a bad idea? Usually, if the model has fair skin, I'll meter from the face (in whatever light she is in) and open up 1/2 to 1 stop. If she is black, or has dark skin, I stop down 1/2 to 1 stop. Is this a good rule of thumb for spot metering from a face? Francesco At 10:29 PM 8/28/98 -0600, GBICKET wrote: >Your film choices sound smart. You might think of taking some Provia or >Astia for in-between speed with grain under control. If you tried the >Vario-Elmar R 35-70mm f4, you could take the R7, and the 100mm. For speed >you could do the new Summilux R 50mm, or the Summicron R 50mm, depending >upon your budget. The Summicron is a helluva lens, cheaper, and better in >some dimensons according to Erwin. Also available used at better prices >than the f1.4. > >Don't be afraid to try the zoom, it has an aspheric element and delivers >*impressive* images. Also, rumor has it that Photokina next month is going >to include a new zoom in this handy range, but f2.8. The speed will be >handy if they can avoid making it big and heavy. Size and weight of the >current Vario-Elmar R 35-70mm f4 [with close focusing] is exceptional. Only >criticism is the front element rotates as you focus, complicating polarizer >use. Otherwise, it's a beauty. I use mine a lot, and it is a good one. I >think you'd be surprised. Your 100/50/28 combo would not be a bad one at >all, but the zoom is more flexible, and renders fine images. > >As to the 28mm, it is purely subjective, but let me suggest you try a 24mm >on your R7 before you jump on a 28mm. Just try one on. The "look" is >different, and in my view, more attractive through the 24mm. You get more >in your viewfinder versus the 28, and without significant increase in WA >distortion. > >The R versus M dilemma is a hard one, but I'm a devout SLR guy who shoots >longer than 200mm a lot. So if a little bigger and heavier is not too >cumbersome, I'd stick with the SLR. > >Hope this helps, enjoy your trip. > >Greg Bicket > >-----Original Message----- >From: Five Senses Productions <fls@home.com> >To: GBICKET <GBICKET@email.msn.com> >Date: Friday, August 28, 1998 10:00 PM >Subject: Re: COPY: Travel > > >>I have still not decided on film choices and on which >>camera to take (M6 or R7). If I take the M6, I will have >>my 35, 50, and I'll have to buy a 90. If I take the R7, >>I'll have my 100 and I'll have to buy a 28 and 50. >>For film I think I'll take 30 rolls of Velvia, 10 rolls of >>E200, and 10 rolls of TMax 400. >> >>Francesco >> >> >> >> >> >>At 07:42 AM 8/28/98 -0600, GBICKET wrote: >>>Absolutely! What else? Unless you need longer telephoto, the 24mm >Elmarit >>>f2.8 and the 35-70 mm Vario-Elmar f4 provide lots of alternatives. I used >>>the 50mm Summicron f2 for low light situations. All are small, light, and >>>render exceptional images. >>> >>>GB >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Five Senses Productions <fls@home.com> >>>To: GBICKET <GBICKET@email.msn.com> >>>Date: Friday, August 28, 1998 12:49 AM >>>Subject: Re: COPY: Travel >>> >>> >>>>Are you talking Leica R lenses? >>>> >>>>Francesco >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Francesco, >>>>> >>>>>I spent two weeks in Tuscany this spring using primary two lenses which >I >>>>>think are a terrific travel combination. >>>>> >>>>>I used the 24mm wide angle for many shots, and when I didn't, I used the >>>>>35-70mm zoom. The zoom was the new one, with a "macro" setting. They >are >>>>>both small, light, very sharp, and render color robustly. For a travel >>>>>situation, they worked very well. For speed, I use a 50mm Summicron, >>>which >>>>>is an exceptional lens. Erwin Puts' report the other day indicates to >me >>>>>that perhaps I still have the best 50mm, albeit not quite so fast as the >>>new >>>>>f1.4. >>>>> >>>>>Anyway, consider the 24/35-70 combination. There was very little I >>>couldn't >>>>>do with this combination, and I did not find myself wishing I had other >>>>>lenses with me. >>>>> >>>>>Enjoy your trip. >>>>> >>>>>Greg Bicket >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >