Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think, Martin, that your concluding statement says it all. If you know your film and how to process it, you've got half the battle won. If you really know what your equipment will do, you've gone all the way. My quick war story was an event in a very dim cathedral where an old college roommate was being installed as the dean of a theological seminary, and I was in a pew with an M3, Summarit and Tri-X. The light level was so low that I couldn't get a reading from the MR meter so I mentally calculated down from a lighting environment whose exposure I knew. The result was, if I do say so myself, a very nice portfolio of that memorable event including a portrait at the lectern that now hangs in his office. Roy On 15 Jan 99 at 23:40, Martin V. Howard wrote: [snip] > I would welcome comments from those who use the older Leica gear. > Those with IIs and IIIs, who use 35 Elmars and Summarons, 50 > Summars, Summarits and Summitars, 90 Elmarits and 135 Hektors. Tips > for using cameras without built-in meters in poor, non-uniform > lighting. Not because I'm anti-technology, but because I'm sure you > exist and it would be a nice balance to the discussions about > high-tech, super-expensive, exotica. Leica, to me, is as much about > being able to take pictures where an SLR wouldn't work, as it is > about quality, myth and money. > [snip] > > I'm sure that those who have bought Noctiluxes are very happy with > them. Still, I'm convinced that spending the equivalent on > practicing (i.e., film, developing and printing) would ultimately > result in better photographs. At least for me. >