[Leica] Millimeters and Milliseconds

[Peter Klein <pklein@2alpha.net>]

Ted:  A few more thoughts on shutter delay, lens figures, and bokeh.

As you've said before, you get the fastest lenses you can, and you get
the subject in focus.  Bokeh, shmokeh.  Fine-art aesthetic
considerations don't matter to you, you say.  To which, I would add the
word "consciously."  You've simply integrated into your shooting style
the arty considerations that matter to you, and you just do what comes
naturally after decades of professional experience.

And as a photojournalist, you are primarily a practical cat.  Your Prime
Directive is "get the picture." Period.  So if the subject is in focus,
doing something relating to the story, that's what matters.  If the
background is wiry, or you can't see the texture of the eyebrows, so what? 

I am not a professional photojournalist, so my equipment is not
amortized, nor does it earn back the dollars I paid for it.  I'm not
rich.  I most like to capture fleeting human expressions in available
light.  For better or for worse, this makes me a prime candidate for
Leica and fast lenses--expensive stuff.  Champagne tastes on a beer
budget.

I also shoot for me, not for an editor. I care about overall "look"
more than a photojournalist on assignment.  And after several years of
reading the LUG, I probably care a little too much about subtle sharpness.
But there was nothing subtle about the difference between the 35 Summilux
ASPH and non-ASPH shots Rei posted. 

I would love to test lenses the way Alfred Eisenstadt did.  He bought a
lens, and if he liked the pictures it took, he kept it.  Otherwise, he
sold it.  At $1500 to $2000 a pop, that's not something I would do lightly
with a 35 Summilux ASPH, 90 APO or Noctilux.  What I'm trying to evaluate
is how much I would truly gain from the newer lenses, and whether that
gain is worth the pain of the price.

So, while I don't really care that much about squigglies per millimeter or
MTF curves, I do read about them.  And more important, I ask other Leica
photographers questions about how well their lens works in this or that
situation.  The point is, how much will these lenses help me to take
better pictures.  And if I can get away with an older lens or a non-Leica
lens, 

I've taken a number of wide-open shots that I think would have benefited
from a 50 Summilux or Noctilux or a 35/1.4 ASPH.  BUT, one pays a price
with the newest lenses beyond money--you sacrifice a classic "look" that
some of us like.  Also, sometimes in the newer, better lenses, the bokeh
can be very distracting.

I find bokeh to be very real.  I don't think it can make a bad picture
good, but it can make an otherwise good picture painful to look at.  Take
a look at Hans Pahlen's Nocton photos:

    http://w1.320.telia.com/~u32008343/bokeh.htm

On some of the pictures, the background pulls my eye to it, and it makes
me feel a little unsettled (probably a milder version of Rei's famous
NauseaLux effect). Something to do with edges in the background, how
things jump out of focus rather than gradually blurring.

- --Peter Klein
Seattle, WA




- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html