Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 4/5/02 dante@umich.edu wrote: > > First, it's just mind-blowing that I read people talking about how >"liberating" it is to have "complete control" of the exposure. Complete >control over exposure adds nothing to your pictures. A moderately skilled >photographer with a camera with AE lock is capable of getting the same >exposure results (maybe even better) as a Leicaphile who just follows the >arrows. That manual exposure-setting is intellectually equivalent to >autoexposure. > > But the bigger point is that screwing around with arrows and match >needles distracts you from the only thing that really counts: composition >and control of lighting sources. [As an aside, I suspect this is why most >college photo class pictures shot with K1000s are awful]. As long as you >have reasonably good exposure, it doesn't matter. Bad composition is not >correctable. Moreover, the M (and other RFs) fail miserably at providing >consistent, repeatable use of DOF as a compositional element, especially in >portraits. I'd take an 80 Summilux-R over a 75 Summilux-M anyday. > Silly me. I thought photography IS about control: control of shutter speed, apeture, angle, composition, light (where possible), lens focal length, film speed, film characteristics, aspect ratio, framing, supplimental light. I'm sure there are more but those leap to mind. And that doesn't touch the back-end set of decisions that go with film developing and printing. It's ALL about control. I have discovered as I learn the R8 that I get lazy with all that automated exposure control. I stop thinking. Now I freely admit that I don't use the internal metering in my M6. I use a spot-meter. I try to work with thumbrules to check whether the exposures I've dialed in make sense. It's about THINKING. I think more with the M than the R. I don't believe this has anything to do with penises, or any other body parts. I could be wrong, many folks who have read my posts in the past can agree with that. But I seldom take photos where it's important to quickly get the camera up to my eye and snap a picture. THOSE people need all the tools they can get. Or, to be more precise, they need tools that match their working style so they can evaluate and make the images they desire. No one will accuse the M6 or even the M7 as being the ultimate state of the art. They do represent, however, an evolution of a particular trend in design. Unfortunately, and this is definately an opinion based on short experience, unfortunately the collectors market tends to make Leica complacent. Perhaps they don't have the bucks to invest in engineering. I don't know. But it seems to me that there are many improvements to be made to the basic M camera beyond the M7. But Leica and its user base (as the LUG comments suggest) are very conservative and happy to stay with what they have - even if there are improvements that could and should be made. So I'd be reluctant to get into arguments that suggest control isn't important. Adam Bridge - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html