Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/13

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Mike'n'Marc'n'Zeiss
From: D Khong <dkhong@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:44:35 +0000
References: <3.0.2.32.20001113060433.0100aca4@pacific.net.sg> <B631F8F1.6EB%michaeljohnston@ameritech.net> <200011100401.UAA19025@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>

Guy Bennett wrote:
>dan,
>
>while i wouldn't flame you for preferring the g2 over the m6 for your
>photography, 

Phew!  Still alive...

>i do take issue with the commonly made argument that the
>manual setting of exposure controls inevitably leads to missing pictures.

Manual setting of exposure does not lead to missing pictures but sometimes
to poorly exposed ones. If you pan your M6 from zero degrees say from your
right to 180 degrees to your left, you will find that the meter will show
that the whole scene does not have the same exposure. So if you were to
snap say 4 shots while panning from right to left, some of the shots will
be overexposed and some will be underexposed. For B&W work, I am able to
compensate for this difference manually in my darkroom but it will slow
down my speed in which my prints can be processed. If I were to use my G2,
every exposure can be spot on and I find 4 printable negs which I hardly
have to vary the exposure time with in my darkroom. To me, this is important.

>this view presupposes that we are all out there snapping away at quick
>moving scenes that allow no time for reflection about which shutter
>speed/aperture combination would be best to capture the image at hand, 

Sometimes, this happens. I have encountered many occasions when, if I had
taken the trouble to set shutter speed/aperture, I would have lost that shot.

>about: composition, and i don't think that is true either.

I disagree. Good composition with an interesting subject always attracts
the viewer. 

>i'd say that 95% of my shots are correctly exposed, because i take a moment
>to consider the image i'm after, meter the scene and set exposure
>accordingly. 

I think we are working with different subjects. This can be difficult to
compare. Many of my subjects are fleeting, just there to be captured in a
moment and then gone forever.

>if i'm roaming the streets, i'll have the camera preset for
>the lighting in question, and the lens set to the hyperfocal distance so i
>can react quickly should i see some fleeting something i want to capture on
>film. 

That is the same trick that I would use if I only have a camera with manual
focus and manual exposure.  I'd get most of my focus right and many of my
exposures too. In my experience, my G2 captures MORE printable images when
I'm doing street photography. I believe our styles can differ somewhat.

>i have never felt that i missed a shot 'cause i was 'fiddling with
>camera,' though i've missed plenty because the camera was still in my bag/i
>wasn't paying enough attention/i was lazy/etc. when i'm prepared and awake,
>i don't think i could react any quicker with an ae/af camera than i can
>with a leica.

When I am in the same situation, my G2 is slung around my neck and I am
walking and snapping away. Nobody knows I am taking their picture because
my camera is still at waist level. This gives me tons of spontaneous
expressions never achievable compared with if I have to bring my camera to
eye level. So I don't have to focus, don't have to adjust exposure, but
just keep that G2 horizontal and just snap away. For street photographic
nirvana, this cannot be beaten. Then there's those CZ lens quality.....

Dan K.




  

In reply to: Message from D Khong <dkhong@pacific.net.sg> (Re: [Leica] Mike'n'Marc'n'Zeiss)
Message from Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net> ([Leica] Mike'n'Marc'n'Zeiss)