[Leica] M8.. Kurland

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

Barnack thoght that to have movie film (35mm film) work for stills it had to
be double frame not singe frame. Was not alone or first in that thought.
Double frame is or was 36x24mm.
Single frame then was 18x24; the way most films were being shot. Movies.
It felt it needed to be doubled for stills. They were right.

The 1.5 crop or APS-2 and 1.6 is close enough is within a millimeter or so
of 18x24. The Movie format Barnack did not thing big enough for stills.

I LOVE what we NOW call half frame or 18x24 would kill for a 18x24 Leica 72.
The late John Black had one; brought it to a LHSA meeting to show me; mint
condition. Shot verticals. Portrait mode. Portraits of trees. Unless you
tilted it.

With the tab grain films of nowadays it would rock.

But I'd not use it for most the jobs I'd ever get.
I'd think of it as for "sketching".
But love the depth of field I get with it.
The DOF.

I use my IIIF more than I use my M6's.
The last film I shot was in Rochester in October.
It was with my IIIF. Left my M system at home.
M's are way too big. 24x36 format deserves a camera the size of a Barnack.
Not an M.

And yes I know a IIIF is a bit late in the game to be thoght of as true
Barnack. Was the IIIA the latest?


I'm ready for the M8 to evolve.
Its a start. I'm glad its there. I'm glad people are using it.
I'd love one I'd probably say better things about it if I had one to use.
But I'm patient.
Evolution requires patience.

Or radiation.

Or Catastrophe.

I've made 40x60's from 35mm negs.
They look very viable though hopefully not hung close to a shot from medium
format or sheet film.
Half frame I don't think so.








mark@rabinergroup.com
Mark William Rabiner



> From: Alastair Firkin <afirkin@afirkin.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:48:29 -0700
> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] M8.. Kurland
> 
> Hi Mark,
> well said. Well summaried. To be honest, the full frame bit is the least of
> your issues. If Barnark had made the film size a bit smaller you might be
> demanding that, but you are correct on the other fronts. The camera is more
> like a Barnark than the M6. In those days, there were all sorts of fiddles 
> and
> things that the photographer had to remember. I recall setting ASA: what an
> annoyance, and the data read out on the film was lousy. You had 2 windows 
> to
> use, one to focus one to compose, you needed multiple viewfinders, close up
> attachments, 2 dials for shutter speeds, reset the film counters, even load
> your own film!!!!
> 
> The M8 is a compromise. I don't think anyone would have built a digital
> rangefinder from scratch like it, but that is the issue, its a 21st C 
> camera
> trying to use 1950's technology. I still thank Leica for being brave 
> enough to
> release it. I suspect there must have been many doomsdayers who saw this 
> noisy
> heavy fat M on steroids to be the death of the company, but it is the only
> real way to use the M glass and digital together.
> 
> Lets hope it evolves like the original cameras into something more useful: 
> In
> reality, Leica should have abandoned its old mount and re-invented the 
> system
> like most other companies, but I'm glad they didn't. The bugs are "fun" 
> for an
> amateur, but I'm sure they are hell on earth for pros.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> --- mark@rabinergroup.com wrote:
> 
> From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] M8.. Kurland
> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:28:25 -0400
> 
> That post that's out now says it all.
> Its out from Alistair Firkin.
> "[Leica] I have come to this conclusion"
> 
> He says use this lens with that use that lens with this.
> Turn that one setting off with this lens but with the other lens use the
> other thing but take the thing off the front.
> 
> I'm not buying the camera.
> 
> Not for 4 grand not for 3. And not for 2 either.
> I'll spend real money on a camera which works.
> Very little on one which doesn't.
> 
> I'd buy a preferably full frame Leica M9 for 4 or 5 grand as I have a
> complete set of Leica glass.
> I'm not using special cut off filters or a camera which requires them.
> I'm not going into menus and turn off settings for one lens and not the
> other.
> 
> And I want a camera with auto ISO.
> And preferably full frame or darned close to it.
> I said that already. Almost.
> 
> 
> 
> mark@rabinergroup.com
> Mark William Rabiner
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Frank Filippone <red735i@earthlink.net>
>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
>> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:20:20 -0700
>> To: 'Leica Users Group' <lug@leica-users.org>
>> Subject: [Leica] M8.. Kurland
>> 
>> Kurland has an M8 advertised at that auction place...... $3995
>> 
>> If someone is looking at a second ( or third, or.... this gets really
>> scary.....) body, it is a factory demo.
>> 
>> Frank Filippone
>> red735i@earthlink.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information