DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

User comments btil June 2003

Brent,
You display what I call "Leica nobility". Please don't feel this is an attack on you or any other Leica owner. I own a few (including an M6) myself. You can go out in the woods with a fixed-blade knife and build a fort by bludgeoning everything into submission. Or you can take a Swiss Army knife and have the right tool for each job. Do you have to use them all, all of the time? No. But you always have more tools in your kit available when you do. As far as metering goes, again, look at any test of Nikon (for ex&le) metering systems in the last 30 years and you'll see that the meters are spot on in almost all cases. Probably ditto Leica. But, given the option of having a quality spot, average, and multi-pattern meter available when wanted is something Leica cannot match. The photographer manipulates the camera, not vice versa. I grew up using my father's Leica IIIG and manual focus, match-needle SLRs. I, too, have years of experience and understand that technology, as long as it's at the user's discretion, is always a good thing. To say otherwise is simply arrogance for the sake of being "Leica nobility". I will probably keep my Leicas (especially the Minilux), but I see a time when digital really will replace film. And guess what? They're all autofocus, multi-pattern machines. The fact that over 98% of all pro photographers use AF bodies (35mm shooters) and they're all Japanese is not happenstance. Pros can buy wahtever they want, and they want selectable technology. I own Leicas because I love the optics (though Photodo's best was the Contax 45 G - resolution anyway) and the beautiful build quality. They do not offer this mystical power to improve us as photographers that too many people use as support to spend thousands on Leica gear. I understand this is my opinion, but as an engineer I know the limitations of engineering and boundless limits of hype and just feel we spout to much hype over Leica gear. Again, no offense or criticism of your preferences is intended. Erwin Put's review of the Leica Minilux points to the flaw in manual Leica hysteria - the little autofocus gem can do more, and is harder to master, than any of the manual focus bodies on their own. And it's made in Japan.
 
Julian,
You make a key point. I do NOT support the notion that matrix metering should be turned on and any thought to the scene and it's peculiarities should be ignored. I support technology as a tool to enhance the photographer's capabilities, not replace him as the man-in-the-loop. If Leica made an M-series autofocus body with M lenses developed for it, with full manual capability along with multi-metering capabilities (a la Contax G2) and NO loss in build quality, I would sell my house to buy it (you'd probably have to). I agree with all the glowing praise heaped on Leica lenses (though they are not alone in deserving praise - some superb Contax and Japanese lens designs), I just don't accept that technology is bad and that to truly "see the light" you have to use a manual focus, match-needle Leica.
 
Charles,
I think you have decided I'm a Luddite, which is hardly the case. I was one of the first pros in this area to go digital, and currently operate my business at nearly a 100% digital level. My investment in Nikon equipment is roughly 10 times my investment in Leicas. I'm not waving the Leica flag, nor am I putting down everything more technoligically advanced than a straw broom.

I'll reiterate my point that what I said about the Leica metering was based on my experience. Others may have had different experiences--that doesn't negate mine. And I'll repeat the point that I have been SURPRISED by the results. How is it that this simple little reflective meter can outperform the highly touted multi-segment 3D matrix metering in the Nikon professional bodies?

Let me give an ex&le. For about 15 years, one of my specialties has been performing arts photography. There is probably no more difficult lighting to meter accurately than stage lighting, with brightly lit subjects in the forground and typically dark backgrounds. Using my F5s in spot mode, readings would vary as much as 3 to 4 stops depending on the lens I attached. Shooting transparency film, I ended up throwing out about half of each roll due to exposure inaccuracies. The M6 exposures, on the other hand, using lenses from 90mm to 28mm, always provided a much higher percentage of usable frames. This never made sense to me, but certainly caught my attention.

Today, I shoot all digital for performing arts productions and it has greatly simplified my life--not because the exposures are better in the D1X and D100, but because I can quickly correct them in Photoshop.

"Leica nobility?"
 
Brent,
Your experience level is certainly greater than mine and I have no doubt that the results you achieved were as you say. I often like to debate the Leica mystique and I don't know any more about the topic than anyone else. Please take no offense and I do genuinely appreciate others' points of view. I'm intrigued that you are a heavy digital user now (I just bought a D100 - couldn't afford the loftier versions) and still stay loyal to the Leica brand. Leica nobility was a term my father coined and it was meant to represent an unfailing loyalty to the brand almost to the point of defying all logic (my father was a self-proclaimed member of the nobility). I mean absolutely nothing critical in my responses and most of it is with a smile on my face. Doesn't mean I won't poke jabs on this forum, though! Cheers.
 
No offense taken, Charles. Debate is healthy and often the only way to sift through the layers to find the truth.

I think you'll very much enjoy your D100. It's a superb camera as long as you don't rely on the meter. (Sorry, just kidding). I moved to digital about 3 1/2 years ago because I felt pretty strongly that the revolution was underway and didn't want to get stuck down the road with a learning curve that would leave me too far behind.

Virtually every theatre client I shoot for immediately noticed a jump in quality. Display images previously printed from Ektachrome 320 pushed to 640 suddenly were razor sharp, grain free and perfectly color balanced. The compliments were effusive.

Shooting for magazines, I do sometimes have digital images sent off to a print house which isn't up to speed and the results can be far from great. But for the most part, reproduction quality surpasses what I can do with film. There is also the advantage of not having to haul lighting equipment around because I can control the color pretty effectively in the camera and fine tune in Photoshop.

But now I've managed to stray from the topic at hand, which is the Leica M6. Sorry, everyone, for the digression.
 
Just thought I'd throw in a quick ex&le:


34773.gif
 
Charles,

I do THINK we are in agreement. That is, if you are going to use matrix metering, you have to rely on its exposure measurement (else, why use it?). If you want to introduce your own knowledge and experience into the final exposure decision, then it is best to start with a non-matrix measurement.

If matrix is as good as you say, then sense of comfort has a lot to do with mode choices.

Comfortably antiquated, Julian
 
Why are people saying that Leica can't offer spot, integral and matrix metering? The R8 (or R9) has these modes, albeit not to the extent that Nikon and others have. The R8's metering spot is not as tiny as some and perhaps is better described as "selective"; also, the R8's matrix metering isn't as complex as other manufacturers are offering. However, I haven't heard R8 users complaining about lack of metering sophistication and I wouldn't expect to.

Most R8 users who have discussed the subject seem only to use matrix metering, together with program mode, as a standby for whenever a real "grab shot" has to be taken and there is no time to set erxposure the way they would like. Given enough time, however, they prefer to change to either spot or integral metering with manual or aperture priority mode. This gives them the opportunity to use their expertise to control what's going on. When they do this, they're not significantly better equipped than an M6 or M7 shooter.
 
M6 with matrix metering? Not me.
Correct exposure is as easy as to fill a glass with water needed. In the end everything is trial and error, even with matrix metering. I like my Leica because is easyness. No program to choose, no switch forgotten in off-mode. No thick battery to do things i can easy do with my fingers. No noisy autofocus/winder and no mirror clickclackbang affecting other people. Of course there are disadvantages like speed and weight. To solve this problems i take other equipment. And this is, maybe, Leica`s problem.
 
Back
Top