RE: [Leica] The Leica Look: Another thought on a debate we had a ges ago

["Lee, Ken" <ken.lee@hbc.com>]

Mark,

I agree completely. I love using the 135 for sports. As long as 135 is long
enough, the M is the best for me. I find my "hit rate" is much better when I
can watch the action coming into the viewfinder and reaching the frame. I
took some shots with the Hektor at a small horse show last summer and the
jumping horse is always where I wanted it.  I don't get that with my Nikon
stuff.  Maybe it is because I am getting old and slow?

Ken

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mark Rabiner [SMTP:mrabiner@concentric.net]
> Sent:	Thursday, November 04, 1999 1:29 PM
> To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject:	Re: [Leica] The Leica Look:  Another thought on a debate we
> had ages ago
> 
> The Zen of the whole thing to me is that with those little framelines we
> might
> actually be composing more for what we are not getting than what we ARE
> getting.
> We are eliminating elements of the picture as we move the camera around.
> We are
> composing for what we don't want instead of what we do want. The
> metephysical
> significane of this is I'm sure great but as I ain't Susan Sontag I can
> say I do
> know I am getting an image which is expressing itself with definatly
> higher
> quality glass. My shots have a glow I never got with my Nikon zooms.
> Obviously if a car or something is traveling along heading into our image
> we can
> now anticipate it better with our Leica M's.
> As you are saying what you seeing with your viewfinder of groundglass is
> certainly going to influence the overall look of your shots. One thinks
> one
> works around the technology, the interface, but it's impossible to ignore
> it is
> the school of thought I adhere to.
>