Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Walt wrote: > >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.... > > > >Just my (probably useless) $.02 Tina Manley responded: > I agree totally, Walt. If you're going to use slow film, fast shutter > speeds, and a tripod for the best possible resolution, why are you using > Leica M's? That to me defeats the whole purpose of the fast lenses and > quiet, unobtrusive camera that is perfect for hand-held shots in low > light!! Slow films and tripods are for medium and large format film. Tina and Walt, Quite frankly I agree with you both, simply because the facts of life as a photojournalist working in all kinds of non-tripod environments, there's neither time, nor space, nor patience of subject to wait around for a tripod toting photographer to get organized. You either "Just do it!" or get out ! And there isn't any in-between, regardless of technical idiosyncrasies or not! I'm sorry, but when I read the basics for fine technical squeezing everything out of or maximizing ones Leica lenses and they must use slow film, tripod etc. etc... In the real world of working photojournalists this just doesn't wash. Yes I know if you have nothing better to do with your time but set everything up so perfectly, the image is as glass cutting sharp your fingers bleed from the cuts when you pick-up the print. But so what, if it has no feeling, no gut wrenching or something that the subject holds you in awe. Then what the hell do you have other than a very fine technical print of photographic paper illustrating you own a tripod , slow film and a Leica lens.... Quite frankly... big deal! Which is better? , a photograph Leica perfect by hand holding in available light and to be told by a viewer, "What you've done in your photographs, is not only capture the emotions of the subjects as they are, but of greater importance, You captured the smells! " I bought/buy Leica because in my estimation they give me the high speed lenses I require for my style of picture taking, generally people in action & doing things. They cut film like a razor and they give me the edge over others in many situations... But more important, they give me an edge over my own simple foibles in camera holding when I might suffer from a breathing twitch in the heat of photographic battle. And they just might cover my ass with the extra edge of sharpness. And that's what owning/using Leica is all about! They're small, compact, ruggedly built, unobtrusive, work for ever under the worst of conditions. quiet, quick and still give you the magic of sharpness that many others fail to do.... and they do all this with fast film and no tripod! That is for working photographers who depend on their ability to shoot quickly in capturing the "magical moments of life!" Although Leica's do a hell of a great job at cutting film for non-breathing things as well! Technique for the sake of technique begets technically correct dead photographs! Sharp and detailed as hell, but dead never the less! ted Victoria, Canada http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant