Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/01

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Erwin, photographic technique
From: Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 16:52:45 -0500 (CDT)

One of the reasons I think Leica lens quality is WAY above 
necessary, and why I wish they'd offer "lesser" but rugged 
gear (like lowering the price on earlier models and keeping 
them in production, once costs are amortized) is this 
very thing.   If you're going to use a good tripod and cable 
release, at optimum f stops, WHY IN THE HELL USE 35mm?....
Even a 40 year old Rollei or a light, small field camera would 
give better results than ANY Leica lens, at 16x20" print size....

I use Leica cuz it's small, light, and unobtrusive...and rugged...
but handheld, with tri-x or 200 ASA negative, the lenses of 
40 years ago were already fine.  You'd have to use 1/500 on every 
shot to see the difference.  Oh yeah, I've "played" with tech 
pan and pan F, in POTA or Microdol, and yes, it's amazing the 
results you can get.....BUT that ain't the use for 35mm....

Gimme a new M2, with a film transport and shutter tough as hell, 
plastic covers if you must, "cheapened" RF....and a decent 
35 f2, 50 f2, 90 2.8 (we already have good cheap wides from 
Cosina)....no motor, match diode meter (external cell OK), 
X sync only, etc.   This is what I see the Cosina Bessa as, 
but I'm worried that they haven't beefed up the transport
and shutter cocking rack in that little body enough for 
pro use.....time, however, will tell.....

Just my (probably useless) $.02

Walt

On Sun,
1
Oct
2000, John Collier wrote:

> I have always got the impression that Erwin thinks that big tripods and slow
> films are the only way to go. As I commonly shoot handheld, sometimes only
> one handed, while doing a vigorous Hokey Pokey with my son at his dance
> class, I feel that Erwin's advice is completely lost on me. I do, however,
> notice differences in lens quality. I too love the 35/1.4 asph and am very
> pleased with its performance both optical and mechanical. After repeated
> close-up use, it has also left a somewhat permanent dent in my sons head
> which has not enamoured my wife to old fashioned metal lens mounts. Oh well,
> I figure that if I am happy and Erwin is happy, then all is right with the
> world.
> 
> John Collier
> 
> > From: Robert Appleby <robert.appleby@tin.it>
> > 
> > Erwin, I've been looking around your site again - I do this every so often
> > as probably everyone on the LUG does. I'm often struck by your references
> > to improving or upgrading technique, which you don't enlarge upon. Could
> > you explain how one should upgrade one's technique to make the most of the
> > higher specifications of new Leica lenses? I ask this on the list because
> > I'm sure that the answers would be of interest to all of us.
> > I wonder whether as a hand-holding documentary photographer, often forced
> > to shoot 1/8 of a second, I can ever really get the most out of, for
> > instance, the 35/1.4 asph. Of course, that in itself is a pretty subjective
> > thing - I like the lens and it suits my needs as a snapper, and I also
> > believe that I can see that it's superior to other lenses of the same
> > length/aperture - but I'm curious to know what kind of technique would meet
> > your standards, both as a lens tester and photographer.
> >
> 
>