Re: [Leica] An attempt to change the subject to a Leica subject

["Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>]

From: <Ruralmopics@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 1999 05:41
Subject: [Leica] An attempt to change the subject to a Leica subject


> One thing I've noticed is that I'm paying a whole lot
> more attention to depth of field -- at least in the
> sense that I've been checking the near focus of a
> the subject area and the far focus and using the depth
> of field scale to sort of zone focus.

I've noticed that I'm doing the same thing, for apparently the same reasons.

I can think of several reasons why I probably do this with the Leica much more
than with the Nikon:

1) The rangefinder accuracy and its detachment from the actual TTL focus
encourages me to focus with extreme precision even when the depth of field is
enormous.  I find that I spend a lot of time getting those two little images to
line up, even though I'm moving the focus plane by only perhaps inches at 10
meters when the depth of field is 3 meters to infinity.  I realize that I don't
have to be that accurate with a focal length of 35 mm and subjects that are tens
of meters away, but the urge to line up those images is irresistible.  I'm
trying to get over it, and the DOF markings help.

2) I have been tending to zone focus, like you.  Often I try to set lens for
hyperfocal focus.  Still, I have an enormous urge to place with the focus.
Yesterday, I spent a lot of time trying to focus on the Eiffel Tower (nearly
half a mile away), getting it at just the right point _before_ infinity when I
perceive that it was just a _bit_ better focused.  All a waste of time since it
was going to be in focus either way, of course.  On a SLR, infinity focus looks
a lot more ... infinite, so you don't tend to fool around with it (particularly
if you have autofocus!), but on a rangefinder, you can't see through the lens,
and any tendency towards perfectionism drives you to focus even when it is not
necessary.  I am trying to get by with just suitable DOF, but it is quite a
task.

3) The AF-S Nikkor on my Nikon has no DOF scale, so I can't consult it (although
I typically do not, even when it's there).  I do use the DOF preview
occasionally on the Nikkor, but on the Nikon, that is more for checking
depth-of-field per se, and not for zone focusing.

> I've also noticed how loud my Nikons seem. The non-motored
> FE2 seems even louder than the F4.

I wouldn't say that my Nikon is loud, but of course it makes far more noise, far
longer than the Leica.  Given what it is doing, it's pretty quiet, but it
obviously cannot compared with the discretion of the Leica from a noise
standpoint.

> I'm pleased to see that my focus and exposure success rate
> is very high -- perhaps even higher than with the SLR on the
> focus front (I've been having some problem with that lately
> -- need to check the eyeglass prescription, you know).

Even though I've had the M6 for less than a month, I have had _zero_ out of
focus images.  Exposure was iffy at the beginning (although far, far better than
I had expected), but rapidly improved.  In the images I took yesterday, there is
only one exposure error in two rolls, because I forgot to readjust it after
moving between two significantly different lighting situations (overcast shadow
to bright sunlight).

> I have been metering very little actually but I've been
> shooting in situations where I'm pretty comfortable with
> the lighting so I haven't really had to worry about it much.

I have increasingly been metering only once and then shooting until my
composition or lighting changes warrant another quick meter check.  Of course,
the meter operates for every exposure, but a lot of my exposures were of things
again bright sky, so I would meter away from the sky against something that
looked more like my subject, and then recompose and shoot.  Everything came out
fine, and this was slide film.

I also notice that I'm getting more and more used to exposure settings for
different situations, such that it is easier and easier to notice when the
exposure looks at bit too high or too low for the circumstances.

> Film loading has been a breeze. That much I hadn't forgotten
> from my last Leica, 12 years ago.

I had no previous Leica, so no prior experience to benefit from.  I don't find
film loading difficult, just slow.  The biggest problem is that the leaders from
the film cartridges are often wavy, such that they refuse to slide down into the
film gate.  I am getting in the habit of check to make sure that they aren't
stuck against the gate before closing the camera.  If the leader is smooth and
straight, the film slides right into place.

  -- Anthony