Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/10/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I used to shoot lots of sports - high school and college - mostly Olympus OMs. I haven't done that in some years though. I shot a couple of my daughters tennis matches last month - one with an M6 and the other with an OM-4. The difference in the distance from the ball to the racket was astonishing. The M6 won hands down, overwhelmingly. I think it's the shutter response time, although viewfinder width could have some effect. I was really startled by the difference. It's more difference than I expected when I went to rangefinder a few years ago. Now, if I could only get past not having depth-of-field preview... Ric Carter http://gallery.leica-users.org/Passing-Fancies On Oct 21, 2005, at 11:25 AM, Emanuel Lowi wrote: > Shooting sports with an SLR with a high frame rate often gives the > shooter > the illusion of having caught the peak moment -- until you see your > images! > I rather use an M camera whenever possible, with no mirror black > out and > very short shutter delay (of course, only when long lenses aren't > needed). > One or two well-timed shots often does the trick. Seeing is > everything in > photography. If you didn't actually see it, you may not have > photographed it > either. > > Emanuel Lowi > Montreal > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >