Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Erwin Puts wrote in >http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/r/designr8.html >(in dutch) that the R8 is the first example of a new trend in simplicity >(in contrast to Canon EOS, Nikon F5, Contax AX which represent the 'old >way' of increasing the number of functions). > >Erwin, I can't imagine how less could be more. A 97% viewfinder better >than a 100% viewfinder? A 2fps winder (and still no motor available) >better than a 8fps build-in motor? An 3D-RGB sensor less good than a 2D >Matrix meter? A self-adjusting shutter less good than a simpler version? > >The truth is, it's not a trend (Leica is completely disable to create >one), it's Leica's inability to do better. Maybe sometime a 97% >viewfinder is enough, maybe sometime a simple thing fullfils the needs. >In most respects Leica just couln't keep up with the rest. And this is >not a trend but a tradition with them. Some LUGGERS already argued eloquently about this topic. Mayge I may add my own thinking (it is a condensed form of the article which alas is too large too be translated quickly, even by me. The trend in photographic equipment (in the 35mm area that is) since the early seventies and culminating in the F5 and (undoubtedly the New EOS) is this: to take good photographs (good in the esthetic and technical sense) aany photographer only needed an instrument with two controls (distance setting/viewfinding and exposure setting (subdivided in speed and aperture). The knowledge to use these settings had to be learned by practise and the knowledge of a few basic physical facts about illuminance, some practical sensitometry and a very keen eye on the quality of the light. The informed judgement how to combine these simple settings in combination with the light intensity, contrast and some subject parameters reulted in the picture. This mental process not only concentrated the mind, but also is part of the essence of photography. The trend of increasing automation rendered this knowledge partly obsolete: no idea of light levels and luminance istribution: 3D matrix will help you. problems with composing:AF and motorwinder ensure at least one passable shot. I think a 1005 matrix metering pattern is more than overkill. A one degree spot meter (a 1 matrix metering pattern) is the best for a knowledgeable user. A self adjusting shutter: self adjusting valves in a motorcar are great as they are functional and releive the mechanic of costly manual adjustments.Most electronic shuttesr do not need period adjustments, nor will the components stray off from the norm too bad. 25% Off is still very good as emulsion sensitometry will not make such differences visible. (What about all those films with a latitude of =B1 2 stops? or conservative as I a= m 1 stop? what then is a mere 3% off?). The joy of photography as Cartier Bresson tells is is mostly the act of taking the picture: this is a conscious and fine act. The R8 has all the functions to help you experience these conscious acts and give you all technology to do it with excellence and marvel. The ergonomics of the body and the feel of it just invite you (urge you) to go out and take photographs. As does the M6. Photography with the R8 is a mental act as is needed for photography to stay an artform. The effortless and unconscious use of any computer controlled camera may produce stunningly good photography. But I at least do miss something with this kind of picture taking: I can not be proud that I made the picture: I got too much help from my computer. Just as computers are becoming more intuitive to use and cars are adjusting to the congested road conditions, so cameras need to adjust to new environments. I Many observers note a platform in camera and lens design. Innovations are found in digital cameras and hardly in siverbased photographic instruments. More gadgets does no longer make for better photography. More emotion, more perception are needed now and the R8 brings these qualities back into photogarpahy. That is whatt I call a new trend. Not the 97% viewfinder. Remember when cars were judged by cubic inches or horsepower. Anyone interested in these basic facts. The viewfinder of the M gives you maybe 85%. Any problems here? Progress is not always measured along a one dimensional line of greater precision. Well I am surprised I do say thes ethings. Erwin