Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Leicasophisms Re: [Leica] Did Leica miss the boat on the M7 viewfinder?
From: Adam Bridge <abridge@idea-processing.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 20:05:14 -0800

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

Replies: Reply from John Brownlow <lists@johnbrownlow.com> (Re: Leicasophisms Re: [Leica] Did Leica miss the boat on the M7 viewfinder?)