[Leica] Re: Long Lenses and SLRs

[Douglas Cooper <douglas@dysmedia.com>]

>> Quite frankly, if I am going to be doing any
>> real shooting with any thing longer than a 50 it will be mounted on a
>> reflex, which for me means the Nikon 85 1.4, which is as good as
>> anything Leica makes, or the the 60 2.8 macro, which is also as good as
>> what the gnomes of solms turn out...;-)
> 
> I would accept this if you add in something like "when stopped down to
> 5.6 or 8"
> because other wise - they ain't !

Hm.  I don't really understand this allergy to long lenses on the Leica.  As
long as they're ergonomic -- such as the Voigtlander 75mm, or the smaller
Leica 90's, or even the Canon 135 (if you're shooting an M3) -- they're
really no more difficult to use than the equivalent focal lengths on an SLR.
The focusing issue doesn't wash with me:  critical focus on a model's eye,
for instance, is almost as difficult with an SLR, and almost as likely to be
slightly off.  It shouldn't be this way, but it is, especially if there's
slight movement -- focusing on a ground glass is just less accurate.  For
street shooting, or anything handheld, I think the Leica still wins out at
anything up to 135mm.  For a time I used the OM1 with the Tamron SP 90 -- an
admirable combination, optically and mechanically -- but I found it too
heavy to spend an afternoon of intensive shooting with.  I was photographing
a model on location, and after a couple of hours of handheld work I just
gave up and switched to my M3 with the Voigtlander, even though I didn't
have the proper frame for 75mm.  I just guessed at it, and got superior
results.

And let's face it, this is about as light as you're going to get with an SLR
plus 90.  (I mean, the Tamron lens is absurdly heavy -- the early SP was
built to drive piles with -- but the combination is still probably lighter
than an EOS with wunderplastik 90mm.)

Now, if we're talking about anything over 135mm, no question:  I wouldn't
even bother with the Leica.  I'd rent a Contax or a Canon, or maybe even a
Nikon.  (I've only recently become averse to Nikon.  Not sure it's
reasonable; I just found the chromes from my very first professional shoot
- -- all done with an 8008 and the 24 and 85 AF Nikkors -- and it looks pretty
good, at least in terms of optical rendition.)

(Come to think of it, that shoot was in Hong Kong, and I'd bought a Leica
M4-P in Montreal to trade for Nikon equipment, thinking I'd make a killing.
I came out exactly even.  Should have kept the Leica, in retrospect.)


 

Douglas Cooper
http://www.dysmedia.com