Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/08

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 05:17:32 -0700
References: <20000907181003.12184.qmail@larch.math.umn.edu> <004d01c0196a$6bcf2820$650a0a0a@slamb> <39B8B1ED.E8623353@rabiner.cncoffice.com> <39B8D38C.83A619AB@cybermac.com.au>

Rick Dykstra wrote:
> 
> Mark Rabiner wrote:
> >
> 
> > LOVE watching the strobe go off in that viewfinder.
> 
> But Mark, how do you find camera shake with a 90, or the 135 you've
> talked about using, at 1/50th?
> 
> The only way I can get sharp shots at a 50th with a 90 is to dull down
> the ambient and rely on the flash alone.  is that what you do, or do you
> have a secret?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rick Dykstra

Well the light of the strobe is what takes the picture and that all happens at
very fast shutter speeds. Many strobes have a duration quicker than 1000th.
That's the whole studio photography thing. The ambient light has to not be too
bright. The quality of delta 400 is good enough to use for studio use but I use
the 100 so the ambient light does not became an issue.
Some studio strobes made now have very bright quartz light modeling lights.
But mines an old Balcar system. And a white lighting ultra.
 And 100 is a good ASA for color neg and slide films. 400 you can run into trouble.
Markwr

Replies: Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> ([Leica] Leica Disposable cameras, by Susan Sontag)
In reply to: Message from goldman@math.umn.edu ([Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6)
Message from "Simon Lamb" <simon@sclamb.com> (Re: [Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6)
Message from Rick Dykstra <rdandcb@cybermac.com.au> (Re: [Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6)