Re: [Leica] M3 or rapidwinder (LONG!)

["Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>]

My two-cents worth on whether to rapid-wind or not to rapid-wind are this.
After many years of using Nikon's with motor drive is that you really end up
wasting alot of film and you end up with  a series of shots that look
remarketably like the same shot. With motor drive, or rapid-wind, the
subject has no chance to move to another position and possibly more
interesting shot. This year I have been doing alot of street photography
with my two M2's one fitted with a 50 the other a 35 and I have no trouble
in getting off a series of shots fast. But, I have found with street
photography that you have to be able to see that interesting picture in
development and be ready for "the decisive moment." The moment is probably
long gone after the second frame and anybody can get off two quick shots
with the lever advance. Even as I pull the M an inch from my eye as I
advance the lever I can still see the shot through the view finder. So, I
think for street photography rapid-wind or motor drive not necessary. But,
there are many action applications where rapid-wind would be very useful.
Steve
Annapolis
- ----------
>From: Martin Howard <mvh@media.mit.edu>
>To: LUG <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Subject: Re: [Leica] M3 or rapidwinder (LONG!)
>Date: Thu, Sep 2, 1999, 12:52 PM
>

>
>>[M3 or rapidwinder...?]
>
>Get an M3 and equip it with a rapidwinder ;)
>
>Seriously, though, the two let you do rather different things, so (as
>always) it depends upon your style of shooting and what you want to do.
>My experiences of using the M3 and rapidwinder are:
>
>M3: The M3 is wonderful for 50mm lenses.  I have '50'-eyes, so most of the
>shots I see are in 50mm, which means that my M3 gets a fair amount of
>exersize.  With the 50 mounted, you get only the one frameline (with nice,
>rounded corners to show you the outlines of a mounted Kodachrome slide ;)
>and near 1.0 magnification (it's actually 0.91x).  If you shoot with both
>eyes open, it's fabulous, because you can see the action going on around the
>framed portion: it takes a little getting used to, but if you can shoot with
>your right eye to the VF, then it's like having a pair of framelines just
>hanging/floating around in your field of vision.
>
>Of course, the M3 is also good, by virtue of it's greater magnification, for
>lenses longer than 50mm: The higher magnification affects the effective
>length of the rangefinder, or something like that, which means that
>focussing with a 90/2.0 wide open (or similar critical situation) is easier.
>
>Then, there is the silky smooth feel of a 35yo, well looked-after M3.
>
>Rapidwinder: I'm currently using a rapidwinder on my M2 which Tom is
>exceedingly generously letting me borrow until the one I've ordered is
>completed.  I've been using this for two or three weeks (time flies when
>your having fun, so I'm not quite sure ;)
>
>The RW is great for streetshooting.  It's a style of photography that
>fascinates me a great deal, and the advantage of the RW is that it enables
>you to get two-three shots off in rapid succession.  I haven't mastered the
>style or technique yet, but practicing at home I'm getting to the point
>where I can shoot without taking my eye from the VF and not jiggle the
>camera too much.
>
>I use an incident meter and preset exposure and zone focus.  Then, with the
>RW, I can get two-three shots off of people on the streets here in Boston
>before anyone has noticed.  This would not be possible without the RW.
>
>Another benefit of the RW is that it adds height and stability to the
>camera.  With the RW lever down, the thumb of your left hand goes along the
>left side of the camera, the index finger rests on the focussing tab or lens
>barrel, and the remaining fingers of the left hand support the camera and
>wrap around the RW lever.  Leaning the camera on the bones of your nose and
>eyebrow and gripping it firmly with the right hand, this results in an
>exceptionally stable platform for the camera to rest upon.  I'm quite sure
>that this lets me shoot at one speed slower than normal, along with a little
>controlled breathing.
>
>Stability also becomes an issue when shooting with longer and heavier
>lenses: I don't own a 75/1.4 or any 135, so I cannot comment on those, but I
>do have a 1960's 90mm f/2 Summicron, which, by M-standards, is a pretty
>heafty piece of glass.  Having the RW as an additional few ounces of
>counterweight to this when it's bolted onto the M2 results in better
>ergonomics.  (Of course, having an M3, it gets used on that most of the
>time.)
>
>So, bottom line?  It depends! ;)  My dream camera would be an M3 with RW
>and 50mm f/1.4, and I'll get there some day.  That would suit my style of
>photography exceptionally well.  I hope that the information above (based
>on first-hand experience) can be of some use in helping you make a
>decision (feel free to email me privately otherwise, if I can supply more
>info).  I guess the best thing would be if you can find either an M3, or a
>RW, or both, and try them out and see which suits your needs best.
>
>M.
>
>-- 
>Martin Howard                     |      2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large
>Visiting Scholar at MIT Media Lab |      values of 2.
>email: mvh@media.mit.edu          | 
>www: http://mvhoward.i.am/        +---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>