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

I agree with Photo Phreak to a point.

We Leica users become so involved with our M3s and M6s and MP cameras so much that I think we sometimes lose sight of the bigger picture. Any camera, film or digital, is only a tool with which to produce and end product. For me it is mostly a great big fibre-based print. Pretty useless unless you want to hang it on a wall.

Without digital photography film is dead anyway.
Some years ago I read some where that about half the worlds silver production was used for photosensitive materials. And the projections were that there was approximately 40 years supply left.

The figures may be old and may not be entirely accurate, but the principal still holds. As less silver is available, film gradually becomes more expensive until it is too costly to use. less people use it and so the cycle goes.

There are literally thousands of different processes for making photographic prints that do not rely on silver. and many of these produce finer results than silver gelatine technology. Digital negatives can now be produced on acetate via computers and printers. No need for a beautiful MP.

However i make the point again as long as there is silver, the cine industry will have a use for 35 mm film. That is basically the stuff we put in our Leica CRF cameras. People will be still using their MPs 40 years from now.

interesting discussion, craig
 
While I'm still looking forward to purchasing mechanical, film cameras like the MP, I agree -Digital is definitely the future. When I founded my studio in 1999, we shot about 10 percent film, 90 percent digital. By 2002, we shot less than 1 percent film.

In the metropolitan area I work in, the actual number of large commercial studios has decreased, but those that survive have gotten larger. The studios that are succeeding are those that can remain competitive price-wise, have an efficient workflow (i.e., number of re-shoots due to mistakes is kept to a minimum)& have adapted to the digital technology.

Also, keep in mind that for higher end commercial work (agency, food, advertising, quality catalog, packaging), just because we're using a digital back doesn't negate the fact we still need high quality, industrial strength photo & lighting gear. We're buying more Hasselblad bodies & lenses (& using digital backs on them instead of the A12 film back), Manfrotto & Mole-Richardson stands, Speedotron & Profoto strobes, etc, than ever before.

Just because we're using a digital back, doesn't change the fact that everything in front of the chip - optics, lighting, etc, still has to be high quality for my customers.

But that's the pro market. There's no denying that the consumer market is going digital rapidly. I see 35mm staying viable for several more years as an enthusiast/professional format for a while, but eventually, I wouldn't be surprised if I was using an M type rangefinder with a digital body one day. As a digital studio, we use different digital backs & digital cameras (like the Leica Digilux) for different needs. Digital doesn't negate the shooting capabilities of a quiet, rangefinder-type camera. As discussed above, for certain types of work, it is the best tool. Adding a digital chip to an M-type body one day makes sense. To a limited degree (and as flawed as it currently is), I find the Leica Digilux is a step towards that experience.
 
I think the MP looks superb, except aesthetically and practically for one thing: lack of self-timer, as on the M3. Couldn't they have brought one back, and put the battery in the baseplate? Then it would look perfect!
 
David,

The self-timer is an expensive addition that one never uses.

Justin
 
Justin

Yes very true. Then again I've only had a Leica M3 for a little over 20 years I might actually get to use the timer in the next twenty. They are fun to play with when you are bored though. Anyway there is no more room left in the M body, you got the choice of TTL metering with battery or an expensive self timer. Personally I like to put my film under the base plate a battery would only get in the way.

If I get to down Melbourne sometime we must do coffee.

craig
 
A mechanical self timer costs about 10-15 dollars, and should work fine with any of the M's
 
Thomas

That's interesting. I've always been led to beleive that a reason for dropping the ST mechanism after the Ms were reintroduced was the additional cost it would add the final price of the camera.

craig
 
A question bothered me very much recently ,M6 ttl,M7 and MP which one is better and which one shall I choose?

Could anyone tell me?
 
>I just read a post from a dealer who returned both of his first MP bodies >because they were defective. One had a defective film advance, and one had >a meter than worked only 1/5 of the time. I'd go with the M7.
 
Back
Top