Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Chris Loffredo, Sep 20, 2006.

  1. I haven't noticed the decreasing performance bit with faster lenses
    (I assume you're talking about classic Nikons with matte screens),
    but I have noticed many quirks & inconsistencies using (esp) different
    (the Zeiss Jena Flektogons 20 & 25mm looking very dark in the viewfinder).
    I'd love to know the exact physics involved.
    Of course, no size fits all.
    And where exact framing is important, a 100% coverage SLR viewfinder is
    unbeatable (I've also used an E screen a lot).
    For most of my low-light applications, where I use a rangefinder, exact
    framing isn't vital.
    The Leicaflexes have nothing to do with the later Minolta-based R- models.
    It's my preferred camera for using telephotos.
    Again, no size fits all.
    My eyesight is good, but in many situations I find myself more or less
    guessing where the point of maximum sharpness is when using matte screens.
    Did I mention somewhere that no size fits all?

    20 years use of a Nikon FM, F, F2 & FE2 with (often) the 35mm f/2.0
    lens. I have to disagree...
    (Ehm... No size fits all?)
    Over 90% of the pictures I take don't involve telephotos over 90mm or
    close-up/macro work. For the rest, I'll definitely grab an SLR.

    => No size fi.. (plug pulled!)
    Chris Loffredo, Sep 24, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Chris Loffredo

    jeremy Guest

    I was referring to the Leica experience.
    jeremy, Sep 24, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. That's as big a gap as I can think of with musical sounds. But a Strad
    in the hands of a hack produces worse sound than a well tempered midi
    synth, at least of a piano, in the control of an artist.

    Analogies almost always leave holes.
    John McWilliams, Sep 25, 2006
  4. Chris Loffredo

    m II Guest

    Not to appear to be bragging but I didn't buy THREE Leicas this year
    alone! In fact, I've lost count of the number of Leicas I haven't
    purchased over the years.


    No, Mr. Chavez---Bush isn’t the devil. I’ve seen the devil’s work. He’s

    Shakespeare's Sister
    September 20, 2006
    m II, Sep 25, 2006
  5. Chris Loffredo

    Scott W Guest

    One might also ask if you are impressed with the prints from a 4x5
    camera or
    is 35mm good enough for you...

    Scott W, Sep 25, 2006
  6. Unlike violins, however, 35mm _IS_ good enough for smaller prints. At 8x12,
    at its best, 35mm can be flipping amazing, just as 8MP digital can be. By
    12x18, however, it's another story. That's medium format (and 12.7MP
    digital) territory. 4x5 starts to sing at 16x20, where it's a mere 4x
    enlargement from the film<g>.

    (Actually, violins aren't all that different. The reason you want a Strad is
    to be heard at the back of the hall over the orchestra; a good violinist can
    get a wonderful sound out of a Vuilllame or a Cuypers or any of a dozen
    other second-string makers (cheaper instruments in the US$30,000 to
    US$100,000 range) but for bigger halls, you need the more expensive

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 25, 2006
  7. Chris Loffredo

    Doug Robbins Guest

    That would be the experience of using a $10,000 camera outfit to take the
    same mediocre photos you could take with a Canon Rebel?

    Doug Robbins, Sep 25, 2006
  8. Hmmm... I notice that you actually *do* have a "bit" of experience using

    Chris Loffredo, Sep 25, 2006
  9. Chris Loffredo

    Stacey Guest

    Very true and most are so automated there is nothing you can do as a
    photographer to change this. 90% are as uncontrollable as a brownie was.
    I've been teaching photography classes and most of the cameras my students
    bring are useless for trying to teach photography with.
    Stacey, Sep 25, 2006
  10. Chris Loffredo

    Paul Rubin Guest

    The most manual camera in the world has no settings to adjust the
    composition of a picture, or its subject matter, or its lighting
    (beyond firing or not firing a flash). These factors almost always
    determine the quality of a photo much more than any manual departures
    from an automatic camera's focus and exosure settings would.
    Paul Rubin, Sep 25, 2006
  11. Chris Loffredo

    Scott W Guest

    Clearly we approach photography in a complete different way, I always
    control the setting of the camera never letting the camera guess what I
    want. I know what DOF I want, I know where I want to focus. I know
    the sweet spots from my lenses if I want the sharpest photos. I know
    how steady I can hold the camera, the setting of the camera is going
    to be way different it I have it on a tripod vs. hand held vs. standing
    on a pitching boat.

    Beyond some cameras not allowing control of the setting most cheap
    cameras do not do well in low light, and many cameras has not provision
    for extern flash units.

    Also a good camera will allow for the use of much longer lenses hand

    As I said before you can get a good photo with just about any camera,
    but a good camera allows you do shoot a much wider range of subjects
    under a much wider range of conditions.

    Scott W, Sep 25, 2006
  12. Chris Loffredo

    Stewy Guest

    I imagine some exec at Leica thought
    "we need to offer some digital thingy, Hassy has so why not us? We know
    our 'Leica or nothing' users will snap it up no matter what so let's
    just cobble something together and put an outrageous price tag on it"
    Stewy, Sep 25, 2006
  13. Chris Loffredo

    Stewy Guest

    I think he's confusing 35mm with 16mm, or then again he could be a time
    traveller from the days when 5x4 was the standard
    Stewy, Sep 25, 2006
  14. The latter. I use medium format for anything that doesn't need to go larger
    than 13x19.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 25, 2006
  15. Chris Loffredo

    Tony Polson Guest

    It is a form of inverted snobbery.

    If they cannot afford it, it cannot possibly be worth buying!

    Tony Polson, Sep 25, 2006
  16. My experience when taking pictures is that when it doesn't
    come out it is my fault, almost never the camera's.

    'The camera got it wrong' translates into 'the photographer
    used the camera wrong.' The camera only gets it wrong
    when the camera is broke.

    If the resolution isn't what the photographer wants then he
    is using the wrong camera for the job - and that is not the
    camera's fault. For the right photograph a Holga is the
    right camera to use, for others it may be a Sinar.

    The old adage 'the true artist never blames his tools'
    holds for photography. One part of being a true artist
    is using the right tool for the job and using the tool
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Sep 25, 2006
  17. Not so. Canon A620 ($229 at BH) has manual anything.
    Aperture or shutter priority, or full-manual.

    On a PS digicam, I use auto-focus always.

    rafe b
    Raphael Bustin, Sep 25, 2006
  18. Chris Loffredo

    Scott W Guest

    So in the end you are saying that the equipment does matter, in an
    earlier post it sure sounded like you were trying to say the opposite.

    Scott W, Sep 25, 2006
  19. Chris Loffredo

    jeremy Guest

    The thread had been about what makes the Leica so expensive. Several of us
    argued that the additional cost did not translate into images that were of
    better quality than those taken by the other mainstream cameras and lenses.

    Then the suggestion was made that it was the gratification that came from
    using well-crafted equipment that was what people were paying for when
    buying Leica.

    So it appears that there are no meritorious arguments to support that Leica
    produces images that are measurably better than those of the competition,
    and the only remaining argument is that some people pay Leica's prices for
    an intangible feeling of gratification from handling the equipment.

    To which I respond, as did P.T. Barnum, that a sucker is born every minute.
    jeremy, Sep 25, 2006
  20. Chris Loffredo

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Just recently I read that prints of Ansel Adams' Moonrise over
    Hernandez go for around $15K. You can get several Leica outfits
    for that, and the print just hangs on the wall doing nothing.

    Why does anyone ever buy them? Maybe they know something you don't.
    Paul Rubin, Sep 25, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.