Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/09/04[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
le 04.09.2001 14:06, Mxsmanic à email@example.com a écrit : > Tarek writes: > >> In my experience, errors came when I didn't >> control what I was doing. > > With a manual camera, that is the only possibility. The fact remains, > however, > that making manual adjustments typically requires more time than having them > made automatically in a fraction of a second by a computer within the camera. My experience also goes for automatic cameras. > >> Anything automatic (Exposure or focusing) is only >> reliable to a certain extent. AF and AE can be >> fooled. > > Yes, but I find that AF and AE on a good camera are accurate at least 99% of > the > time, and it is difficult to match that accuracy with any manual camera. 99% Wow! Fantastic. Great. I think it's more a 80/20 ratio. > >> There is no way around knowing your camera and >> meter (tools). There is no way around practice. And >> no way around learning from your errors. > > None of these with provide you with the requisite speed in many limiting > situations. That is why automatic SLRs are more frequently used for many > types > (all types?) of professional photography than manual rangefinders. BS. My Arca Swiss is not even a rangefinder and it's a damn good professional camera. > >> As for the limited conditions under which a >> Leica can take photos... Sorry, but you'll have >> to be more precise on that one. > > As precise as Leica's criteria for determining what makes a photographer > professional, you mean? > > But since I am willing and able to answer questions, I shall do so here. If I > want to shoot at f/2.8 in bright sunlight with Tri-X, I cannot do so with a > Leica M camera, as it does not provide shutter speeds beyond 1/1000 second. I > can do so with an F5, however, since it provides speeds as high as 1/8000 > second. You'll need a 1/16000 of a second to shoot at 2.8 with Tri-X rated at 400ISO, but then again maybe you're rating it at 200ISO. In my original post I suggested a ND filter... > > If I want to shoot racing cars coming towards me using a 90-mm lens, I cannot > follow focus accurately or quickly enough to do so with a Leica M, but I can > easily set an F5 to do this automatically, and it is very accurate. > > Many other examples could be provided. Spare your energy. I'm not specialised in racing cars, so I don't know. I did some high speed shooting with both the M and the R - no problems. But I didn't do any racing cars. I wonder how they used to do it before F5's came out? Huh? Hey Anthony, how did they do it before? > >> Shutterspeeds are not a real problem unless you >> have the wrong film in your camera (nothing a ND >> filter won't solve), what else? > > I cannot change film mid-roll. Sometimes you must take pictures with what you > have. Rewind and put in another roll. Or are you trying to tell me that you are so broke you can't afford to do that? >> lenses? > > Leica lenses are excellent overall, although they are not AF, which can be a > limitation in some situations. Like when you're tired of focusing? In my career I haven't encountered many situations like that. > >> As to the lack of speedy service, the Atelier >> 102 is pretty speedy. > > Pretty speedy to me means within a few hours. How fast is Atelier 102? Speedy to me means they get the camera repaired before my next assignment, they always did. And besides I have more than one spare camera. > >> As to deadlines, any camera that breaks down >> will delay you. > > Yes, but a camera that is broken for several weeks at a time will put me out > of > business. > >> It's always better to have a spare body at hand. > > It's better still to have ten spare bodies on hand. If you can afford them and can carry them why not. IMHO that's a stupid statement, you can do better than that. > But spare bodies are > expensive, and thus not always cost-effective. It can cost less to buy a > camera with a good service network behind it than to buy several identical > cameras just in case one breaks. I guess you still don't get it... I don't buy identical cameras ONLY because one could break. I actually use them. Sometimes I go around with 3 bodies, same film different lenses. Or a B&W/colour combo, or... > >> It's a wonderful tool for travel photography, >> indoor portraits, any kind of journalistic work >> (I've seen M6 bodies that still worked after >> losing the viewfinder glass!), involving HUGE >> time constraints. > > Not if it breaks. Wow! This one really made me laugh! Yo! Any broken camera is worth zilch. You could have a super-duper N***n F5, once it's broken.... > And not for some types of journalistic work--such as sports > photography. I don't think there are too many photographers shooting road > races with 400-mm lenses using Leica M rangefinders. Probably not, although you could. Again it's a tool and you buy a tool according to the use you have for it. > >> I happen to feel at ease with the Leica M system >> and use it most of the time, to make money and >> for my pleasure. > > If it works for you, fine. But an assertion that it must be suitable for > everyone, all the time just because you manage to get by with it does not > logically follow. The original point here was that Leica service is too slow > for many professionals, and that appears to be true, at least in some markets. The original point was answering your statements and giving you my point of view. I never suggested that it must be suitable for everyone. That's your way of doing things. How often have you sollicited the Leica Professional Service in France? > >> Lot's of people thought that buying a Macintosh >> would simply eliminate a professional layouter >> or art director... > > For many applications, it has, and so they were right. Shame on you, the point was in the rest of my phrase: It's not the tool that counts, but the person that's handling the tool. Being un-experienced or un-creative is hardly compensated by a tool. Here I don't know of any application where it has.