Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Bruce Davidson exhibit + Comment
From: Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 20:29:29 -0600 (CST)

Great post, Carl, and thanks for the reply.
Reminded me of several years ago when I walked into the "light"
area of our lab with an M-4/35whatever around my neck, and 
a student asked me "does that old camera really work?"  What 
a hoot we got out of that!  There have been many changes in 
my 25 years, too.  In the early 80s, EVERYONE still at least 
recognized an M -- not today, I'm afraid.......but that's 
an advantage!  I don't worry NEARLY as much about theft/etc!
Keep those M2s/3s shooting and best luck to you in the NEXT 
25 years with them.

Walt

On Fri, 1
Jan
1999, csocolow
wrote:

> Walter S Delesandri wrote:
> 
> > Just wondering, what was "stone-aged" about a Leica M2,
> > 35 summicron, and tri-x in UFG, printed on Medalist with
> > a focomat 1a?  I'm guessing that this was his equipment,
> > at least could have been! (or perhaps a Contax IIIA, 50 1.5, etc?
> > Nikon S2, 50 1.4 Nikkor?) I've used ALL these pieces in
> > the last few years with results EXACTLY the same as the
> > M-6 (R-8) would have done!  I only lacked Bruce's eye/location/etc>
> > Or did I?
> >
> > Walter,
> 
> You perceptively picked up my point. Nowadays everyone feels they need built in
> metering and ultra-fast and/or aspheric optics. Certainly these are creature
> comforts and they do make life easier. I appreciate the convenience of my M6 but
> still use and enjoy working with my M2 and M3 in all their stone-age meterless
> glory. Sure, I wouldn't mind something faster than my 35 Summicron but it works for
> me. So does the 50 Summilux. I can handhold to 1/4 sec with 50+% or better results.
> The trick (having done enough news photography and more than enough commercial work)
> is to use your skills, abilities and resources to overcome whatever the perceived
> limitations of your equipment. As I'm sure you'll agree Walter, you can't pass up a
> good photo just because you think your equipment can't handle it. You go for it, use
> your knowledge, and hope you got it. The better and more experienced you become the
> more likely you are to succeed. The more you screw it up, the more likely will learn
> by your mistake and apply that knowledge to becoming better and more experienced. I
> have been behind viewfinders for almost 29 years and that represents a lot of film
> over the dam (sorry for mixed metaphor- not!). It's the only way to get better.
> Anyway, check out the Davidson work if you have the chance.
> http://www.icp.org/exhibitions/davidson/index.html
> 
> Carl Socolow
> 
> 
> 
>