Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: "I think it's going to be all right" - transposedto Canon, Nikon, etc. etc.
From: walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson)
Date: Sun Nov 19 12:58:48 2006
References: <BAF03DBE-089A-4757-BE26-5AD17F3E91E7@mac.com> <4560B7FA.3010601@waltjohnson.com> <20061119202710.GC24759@panix.com>

Rei

Were Picker still extant one might exhort him to ruefully remove his 4x5 
from its tripod.Then, he might experiment with hand holding and rapid 
shooting in what might be considered the realm of  the journalist. 
Although I must admit to owning several neutral density filters they are 
never allowed to assume the missionary positions.  Stack not least you 
become Canonized.or Nikoned.

Walt

Rei Shinozuka wrote:

>i raise a rueful hand.  B+W and especially slim Heliopan 
>UVs on all lenses, including noctilux, 75 lux, 35 luxen, et al.
>at one point, i did the "fred picker" test whereby in his
>exhortations to eschew filters, he advised us to run tests
>with both on and off.  i personally could see no differences 
>in the negatitves, so i've been filtered ever since.
>
>what might horrify some is my penchant for double-stacking 
>helio NDs and #25 or #11 color filters to facilitate exposures 
>under 1/1000 at F1.0.
>
>-rei
>
>On Nov19 15:00, Walt Johnson wrote:
>  
>
>>Robert
>>
>>I thought I was the only one willing to admit putting cheap-assed 
>>(B&W@40 bucks a pop) filters over my pristine Leica glass? It seems as 
>>if there are more of us out there. Come on boys and girls! Its time to 
>>open that closet door and jump out swinging. This does not include the 
>>Leicaphiles sans filters who always have lens caps in their pockets. We 
>>all know what they do to image quality. :-)
>>
>>Walt
>>
>>Robert Schneider wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I have quality-destroying UV filters on all my lenses, Leica, Canon,  
>>>Xpan, etc., so I am certainly not averse to another layer of glass on  
>>>my optics.  But telling photographers that they have to shell out  
>>>$150 per filter for each M lens they own just to get their camera to  
>>>work the way it is intended to work strikes me as grotesque.
>>>
>>>To me it's simple: If the camera's above-average infrared sensitivity  
>>>is not documented in the M8 instruction manual, if the need for an  
>>>infrared cutoff filter when photographing people wearing clothes is  
>>>not documented in the M8 instruction manual, then the camera is, in  
>>>fact, defective.  It does not function as it was intended to function.
>>>
>>>I am astonished that many people who bought this camera are making  
>>>excuses for Leica rather than storming the gates in Solms.  A  
>>>serious, EXPENSIVE, digital camera from any other manufacturer would  
>>>have its users howling for blood, or at least a permanent, internal,  
>>>non-half-assed fix.
>>>
>>>If the Canon D30 or EOS1d had come to market with imaging defects on  
>>>the order of those in the Leica M8, I suspect that Canon might not be  
>>>the alpha dog in the digital realm.
>>>
>>>IMO, YMMV, IOKIYAR, YYSSW, etc., etc.
>>>
>>>rs
>>>
>>>-----------
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Leica Users Group.
>>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

In reply to: Message from schneiderpix at mac.com (Robert Schneider) ([Leica] Re: "I think it's going to be all right" - transposedto Canon, Nikon, etc. etc.)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Re: "I think it's going to be all right" - transposedto Canon, Nikon, etc. etc.)
Message from shino at panix.com (Rei Shinozuka) ([Leica] Re: "I think it's going to be all right" - transposedto Canon, Nikon, etc. etc.)