[Leica] Leica Camera-Handling

[Alex Brattell <alex@zetetic.co.uk>]

>Mike Johnston wrote:
>
>In response to C.E. Workman Jr.'s question and Stephen's followup, I'd
>like to propose a topic. I'm of the opinion that Leica M camera-handling
>is one of the things that really distinguishes it from other cameras.
>Because it's inherently so responsive, you can use it more or less any
>way you are capable of using it--slowly and ponderously, fast and slick,
>or anywhere in between.
>
>I've heard many stories over the years of Leica shooters improving their
>camera-handling skills over a period of many years. We've all heard some
>of the most famous stories, such as how Capa got his famous picture of
>Leon Trotsky, or Henri Cartier-Bresson hurling his camera at an
>attacker's face only to yank it back at the last second using a long
>wrist-strap...........
>

Has everyone heard these stories? I haven't and they sound like glamourous
stuff. Isn't there a movie in production about Capa?

Loved the tale of Robert Frank -  the Clint Eastwood of photography.
Ere's me own 'umble experience.


I've only been using Leica (M6) for just over 2 years. 
Now I'm used to my Leicas and can operate them by touch alone a lot of the
time, I still don't think I'm that quick on the draw, and there are still
shortcomings to my technique - I think this camera is a 5 year
apprenticeship. A small victory has been becoming able to focus on repeating
shapes (although I'm trying to give them up) by feel and tilting the camera.
Film loading has become natural and fast. It's now my favourite (apart from
flicking sheets into darkslides!).

In pursuit of Fine rangefinder technique:

The Dodge
Automatically moving the camera lens to where the viewfinder was for
critical alignment is 'kin difficult - this should be a habit, haven't got
it yet and sometimes it shows. The slr habit of lining things up really
carefully can hopefully be maintained and improved with the better depth of
field visualisation of the rangefinder. 

The Quick Recomposition
I've made too many pictures where the focussing is critical and so the point
of focus is in the middle of the frame (rangefinder patch)  as I've lost
patience and tripped the shutter after focussing but before recomposing. Far
too much foreground or background is the result and it's rubbish.

The Loose Composition. 
This camera sucks me in towards what it's pointing at due to it's
idiosyncratic frame accuracy - I think I should compose tighter but then
find myself enjoying more space in my pictures (no inclination to crop
anymore - not a dogma, just a preference).

The Expensive Object
Still a bit precious I'm afraid. First camera I ever had lifted, apart from
house burglary, was a Leica. I'm still sometimes a touch too protective of
my cameras, not immediately bringing them out in places where a camera might
attract unwelcome attention, even though they are not usually picked up on
by people as being particularly expensive objects. I suppose in time the
cameras will get scratched up and I will forget what they cost.

The Still Camera
I haven't yet learnt to move towards a subject following focus - I forget
(impatience again) to move forward - stop and photograph - move forwards
again - stop etc  - I just rush it and make a blurry thing instead of a
photograph. As I learn the lenses I hope 'manual autofocus' will happen on
the move too.

Quality
Yes. I have definitely noticed that in col neg/trans and BW neg. The Leica
lenses I use (all recent except for a 65mm elmar) are all significantly
better to my eye than other 35mm optics I have used - which have been varied
and often mediocre. It's also a statement about where you are in
photography, your commitment to it and an assurance of quality that leaves
your own abilities as the main variable. Details and sublety of tone in
prints and transparencies make my work different since I got a Leica. It has
challenged every aspect of my technique, made me re-examine so many aspects
of my photographic practice (with the LUG  occasionallly providing excellent
food for thought). The cost of ownership can only be justified in the long
term - buy the equipment that lets you forget about equipment. If it works
like that, it's a bargain. 


I use the M6's whenever I can, even if no-one who sees the images will ever
notice  (determined to get my money's worth!). But then using the Leica, and
the way theat people react to them is always a pleasure. I know it's absurd
to use a Leica to make a newspaper photograph, all dots and smears (and .jpg
file sizes of around 1.4mb; the look of the early digital age will be
equivalent to the conscripts of the Great War marching comically fast in
newsreels).

The standard is, simply, that if I made a print of it I would notice the
difference and that's worth it to me.

I still use (manual) slr cameras but find them harder to focus - or maybe
i've finally noticed how poor a 35mm 'ground glass' screen really is. Or
maybe my eyes are knackered.

I'm an untechnical photographer, more interested in trying to photograph the
inside of my own head (or my clients'!) reflected in the outer world than
bothering with ideas of 'reality'. Too lazy to do proper tests so remain
surprised that any of my pictures actually come out. I stick with what I'm
used to - FP4, HP5, EPP, Ilfosol S, MGFB, that kind of thing. Insist on my
own BW printing, it's what makes me a photographer by my definition.

Good idea for a thread, and I thought it was about time I made an effort to
write something for the LUG.

all the best
Alex





____________________________________________

                         alex@zetetic.co.uk
    http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~abrattell/

___________________________________________