Re: [Leica] M6 vs the M4, and filter factors

["Jack McLain" <jmclainaz@comcast.net>]

Gotcha...
I see where you are coming from now.

Interesting that I often had to go into "mental overide mode" when using my
F4 or G2.  By that I mean that I had to take the matrix thing into
consideration and compensate for the matrix compensations.  In other words,
I didnt trust the meters.  With the F4 I normally used the spot meter (which
is why, along with auto film advance and rewind, I bought it).

Another point I guess is the wide lattitude of the film that a Leica user is
likely to use (B&W anyway) compared to the color saturated chrome I used to
favor. "Exact" exposure is not as important in all situations.

Thanks for hitting me over the head until I understood.
Jack McLain
Tucson, AZ
http://jackmclain-photography.dotcommunity.net

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Howard" <mvhoward@mac.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] M6 vs the M4, and filter factors


> Jack McLain wrote:
>
> > Yes, I know that; I am quite familiar with the process (as I stated in
> > the
> > subsequent line of my post which you snipped).  What I was driving at -
> > perhaps not too clearly - is the fact that I thought it is curious that
> > there has been no mention, that I have seen, in either the responses
> > to my
> > query in this list, or in the mess of Leica web sites, of the
> > advantage (if
> > any) of being able to utilize filters without calculating (which can
> > take
> > only seconds, but seconds that might make a difference).
>
>  From which we can draw the conclusion that it isn't that much of an
> advantage.  Hence no mention.  Which was my point.
>
> The reason for this is the way that most people use manual
> rangefinders: You premeter exposure and set the camera accordingly.
> Often people will also prefocus (or zone focus -- not the same as
> setting the lens to hyperfocal distance).  Thus, the camera is already
> set up and ready for when the photo appears in front of you.
>
> Using manual rangefinders involves a different working technique to
> using an F4 or G2.  On the latter cameras, all the calculations take
> place when you press the shutter button.  With a manual rangefinder,
> the calculations are done ahead of time so that, when you press the
> shutter button, all you are doing is releasing the shutter.  It doesn't
> matter if it takes 1 or 20 seconds to work out the filter factors when
> you shift the workload.
>
> Advertising hype would have you believe that you need fast autofocus
> and 'intelligent' RGB matrix-metering to get any shot in a fast moving
> world.  They conveniently disregard the fact that 'decisive moment'
> photography was regularly practiced by master photographers using the
> (even slower) LTM generation of cameras.
>
> The reality is that autofocus (no matter how fast) and metering (no
> matter how 'intelligent') take time and make assumptions.  Thus you not
> only risk loosing the shot, but also getting it incorrectly exposed.  A
> manual rangefinder places control in your hands, under your brain, and
> is thus in many cases faster.
>
> Half the fun of using a manual rangefinder is that you learn to think
> different.  The assumptions of using modern, auto-focus, auto-exposure
> cameras do not necessarily apply.
>
> M.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

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