[LRflex] Re: leicareflex Digest V3 #343
- From: Bob LaPree <lapree@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 18:04:30 -0500
I've been hanging back in commenting on my experience using he M8
( I must say at the outset that I find the discussion of Leica
cameras on this forum to be much more reality based than what I've
seen on the Leica Users forum - so many of the comments seem to come
from people that have an "attitude" about what should be a perfect
product and spend way too much time and energy on nit picking and
whining while revealing that they are anything but photographers
working in the real world - the folks in this discussion group strike
me as a very reasonable and reality based group - so much for my rant)
As background - I've been a news photographer/journalist in New
Hampshire for over 35 years. Bought my first Leica (an M2-r) in 1976
with money earned covering the NH Primary for Newsweek - always a
nice day rate. I've had several since then including the Minolta CLE
and M6 ttl as well as the R-4 series and quite a few lenses. I work
as the chief photographer at the Union Leader now and brought them
into the digital age in 1990. We use Nikons and I haven't shot more
than 5 rolls of film since them - with both my Leica outfits sitting
in the equipment closet. When the DMR came out I got one and a used
R-8 - longing to use those nice R lenses again, at least for personal
use - I love it!! But I really wanted to use the M system again.
While waiting for the M digital I got the Digilux 2 a couple of ears
ago and have used it a lot for work, including as an embedded
photographer in Iraq. As long as you use it a low ISO's its make
gorgeous photos and is very unintimidating to the many regular folks
I photograph. (I work up close and personal and sticking a big Nikon
D2X in someone's face can be quite off puting). Now that I have the
M8, I find I'm using it easily for 75% of my daily assignments.
While in no way rigorous in test methods here are a few observations:
The camera handles just like the film M's, though I miss the film
advance lever which helps one hold on to it and I often hesitate when
removing the base plate, wondering if I'd rewound the film.
The frame lines seem dimmer, though that just may be my memory that
is dimmer and they don't seem quite so accurate, but at least they're
looser.
The crop factor is resonably useable - my beloved 21 Elmarit is now
like a 28mm (The whole viewfinder area seems a pretty accurate frame
- though with glasses you have to look around to see it all) To get
back to a 21mm perspective I got the Voigtlander 15mm - it is a
really fine lens and at $350 a bargin to boot! as a bonus the 21mm
auxillary finder works perfectly.
The rest of my lenses - 35 and 50mm Summicrons and the 90mm tele-
elmarit look really good. These are all the older lenses, I can't
imagine what the new glass must look like, but I can't afford them
and am quite happy with them none the less.
The images right out of the camera are spectacular (I shoot jpegs
for work and have only tried raw a few times) They are sharp,
contrasty and the color is excellent, especially if I use the manual
white balance since I generally shoot available light. They have that
Kadachrome skin tone look as does the DMR. Yes I have occasionally
had blacks with a magenta cast - I just go to the black channel in
Photoshop and dial the magenta back until it looks right - pretty
straight forward and doesn't seem to effect the main magenta tone.
I've used the 320 ISO quite often and its virtually noise free, 640
ISO nearly as good, have only gone to 1280 a couple of times and its
quite useable too - remember I'm working with newspaper reproduction
so there is some forgiveness in the noise area and Noise Ninja is a
great tool.
Having been away from the rangefinder system for quite some time it
has been taking some practice to relearn the art of focusing (been
relying on auto focus due to my declining eyesight) and I do find
that I'm having more trouble getting sharp photos at 1/15th that I've
done with ease with the D2X and Digilux2. I think it is due to the
low mass of the camera and what seems to be a rather long travel on
the shutter release, I'm thinking of finding my old soft release add-
on to see if that helps. Also, the battery life is not very good and
the camera stops working without warning when they die - a bit
unnerving the first few times. Got to have 2 at a minimum, but they
are expensive.
I haven't seen any of the so-called banding at high ISO - I suspect
its akin to blooming that sometimes plagues video.
Overall I'm very happy with the camera for its intuitive use, easy
menu navigation, resonably quiet operation and color/contrast
reproduction. I suppose its not perfect, but neither is the D2X at a
similar cost. As a digital cameras its main strength is the immediate
feedback, but especially its familiar M style handling and the
ability to once again use the fine lenses.
Sorry to go on for so long but I thought you folks might be
interested in a practical assesment of the camera.
Bob LaPree
P.S. I have an exhibit of my work on the NH National Guard's
deployement to Iraq - at least half were made with the Digilux2. The
photos can be seen by clicking on the link on the unionleader.com web
site.
On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:01 AM, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote:
> What gets me is how so many people are quick to
> delcare a product to be defective, flawed, etc., where
> a choice was made between two conflicting criteria --
> high perfomrance on WA lenses at the edges and
> corners, vs. increased IR sensitivity causing the
> occasional black/magenta cast. Since the latter is
> correctable in image production, and the former not, I
> for one would agree o the choice that was made.
> Particularly where IR sensitivity can sometimes be
> desireable. Can you imagine the tirades if an IR
> filter was preset causing corner/edge softness?
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
- » [LRflex] Re: leicareflex Digest V3 #343
