Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/29

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

Subject: [Leica] A digital camera without.....
From: hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson)
Date: Fri Sep 29 16:44:29 2006

Slobodan, were you referring to B.D. or me? ;-)
If you hand a DSLR to a Pan Troglodyte, will it Homo Sapiens with the LCD?

Cheers
Hoppy

-----Original Message-----
From: Slobodan Dimitrov [mailto:s.dimitrov@charter.net] 
Sent: Saturday, 30 September 2006 01:25
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] A digital camera without.....

I think the proper term is simian ape. And yes, any well trained  
simian ape can be driven to make a superlative image, with any medium.

Slobodan Dimitrov




On Sep 29, 2006, at 8:20 AM, B. D. Colen wrote:

> Well, it may not be either polite or helpful, Hoppy, it's true -  
> and written
> in response to the kind of nonsense we've seen posted over the past  
> couple
> days about the ability of any monkey to be a great photographer with
> digital, etc.
>
> As to glass plates v film v digital - market penetration doesn't  
> have a damn
> thing to do with it; the transition from film to digital represents  
> a sea
> change in capture medium - in the way in which we use light to  
> record what
> we see in front of us. And it's the same kind of change we had when  
> we went
> from glass plates to film - moving from one capture medium to  
> another. The
> fact that there were far fewer people making photographs prior to  
> film is
> not the issue. Yes, the creation of film democratized photography.  
> But then
> so is the cell phone camera democratizing photography. ( Don't  
> forget there
> were many outstanding photographers and editors who scoffed at 35  
> mm cameras
> as 'toys' as 35 was taking over ;-) )
>
> Sorry, Hoppy, but things have changed in a profound way. If one  
> prefers
> using film, great - there's still film and processing available, so  
> go for
> it. But at the same time, I think that no matter how much one loves  
> film,
> one has to recognize that it is fast becoming an artifact of an  
> earlier age.
> Yes, there are still areas of photography in which film is superior to
> digital, and dominant. And yes, film will undoubtedly be with us  
> for eons to
> come as a 'fine art' medium. But even today, digital and  
> photography have
> become synonymous.
>
> So I guess the bottom line is - things change; get used to it  
> (please),
> which is not to say that one shouldn't shoot film if one wants to  
> do so. :-)
>
> B. D.
>
>
>
>
> On 9/29/06 9:26 AM, "G Hopkinson" <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>> B.D. that's a bit simplistic, suggesting that digital vs film is  
>> analogous to
>> film vs glass plates. I doubt that glass plates had
>> the same sort of market penetration that 35mm film has.
>> No question that digital has the majority of the market, but film  
>> still
>> remains viable currently.
>> People may choose to use either or both mediums right now.
>> Sayings "things change - get used to it" is neither polite nor  
>> helpful in my
>> view.
>>
>> Politely Hoppy
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bd@bdcolenphoto.com]
>> Sent: Friday, 29 September 2006 21:14
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] A digital camera without.....
>>
>> Or, even more simply put - you want a digital camera? Buy one. You  
>> don't?
>> Don't buy one - stick with film as long as you can; there were  
>> undoubtedly
>> people who stuck with glass plates.
>>
>> Things change - get used to it.
>>
>> By the way -the 'hi-speed' frame rate on the digital M8 is the  
>> same as the
>> hi-speed frame rate on an M6 with an Abrahamson winder. Oh, and if  
>> you don't
>> want to look at the LCD? Don't look it it. If you're chimping it's  
>> your
>> fault - not the camera's. ;-)
>>
>>
>> On 9/29/06 1:24 AM, "Nathan Wajsman" <nathan@nathanfoto.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I would not buy a digital camera without a screen, simply because it
>>> would need to have so many little buttons and wheels in lieu of  
>>> the menu
>>> structure that it would be an ergonomic nightmare.
>>>
>>> As for the general comments about "too many features" in digital  
>>> SLRs,
>>> the solution is simple--don't use them! The only controls I ever  
>>> use on
>>> mine are switching between manual and aperture priority modes,  
>>> setting
>>> the ISO speed, changing shutter speed or aperture and formatting the
>>> memory card. That's it. I never chimp. My LCD is set to display the
>>> picture and its histogram for 3 seconds after taking the picture,  
>>> just
>>> so that I can take a quick peak at the histogram if I am so  
>>> inclined.
>>> Since I shoot RAW only, my white balance setting is permenantly  
>>> on AUTO.
>>> And so on.
>>>
>>> The many features of a 1-series Canon are all there, but they  
>>> certainly
>>> don't get in the way of my photography. I have set up the camera  
>>> the way
>>> I like it (regarding focus points etc.) and left it like that  
>>> ever since.
>>>
>>> All this reminds me of some of the complaining about the aperture
>>> priority mode in the M7 or even the presence of a light meter in  
>>> the M6
>>> (the indications in the viewfinder were distracting etc.).  
>>> Solution is
>>> simple: if you don't like AE mode, then don't use it; if you  
>>> don't like
>>> the light meter in your M6, then take the battery out.
>>>
>>> Nathan
>>>
>>> David Rodgers wrote:
>>>> Digital cameras have many features. I'm wondering if some  
>>>> wouldn't be
>>>> better off with fewer. For instance, what if there was a digital  
>>>> camera
>>>> without an LCD preview screen? It'll probably never happen. And  
>>>> maybe
>>>> it's not realistic to think it ever would. But if anyone could have
>>>> bucked the trend it would have been Leica. What if Leica hadn't  
>>>> put an
>>>> LCD on the M8? We'd have screamed, for sure. But might not the  
>>>> M8 have
>>>> been a better camera for it? Here's why.
>>>>
>>>> 1) no chimping. My first reaction after snapping the shutter on any
>>>> digital camera is to look at the screen to see if I "got it"!  
>>>> The irony
>>>> of that is that if I didn't get it I probably just wasted a second
>>>> opportunity because I was too busy looking at the LCD. And so  
>>>> what if I
>>>> didn't get it? What are my options? Unless I can fly around the  
>>>> world at
>>>> the speed of light and turn back time, it's too late. What time  
>>>> I might
>>>> have had I just wasted...chimping.
>>>>
>>>> Consider the case of someone having closed eyes in a shot. It takes
>>>> longer to verify that there were no closed eyes than to shoot 5  
>>>> frames,
>>>> which was the old cure for closed eyes. With the M8 we shoot 5  
>>>> frames in
>>>> 2.5 seconds. That's less time that it takes to analyze the LCD.  
>>>> Not to
>>>> mention, "Sorry but Uncle Bob had his left eye half shut.  
>>>> Everyone line
>>>> up again!" or "Sir could I please get you to walk back under  
>>>> that bird.
>>>> I see in my preview window that you didn't have quite the  
>>>> expression I'd
>>>> hoped for when it crapped on your shoulder."
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we need to see images so we can delete the bad ones and  
>>>> save
>>>> card space. Yet isn't that one big benefit of digital cameras  
>>>> over film?
>>>> Each frame is essentially free, and I'm less constrained by the  
>>>> roll of
>>>> 36. Why not just delete bad images later, after they are  
>>>> downloaded?
>>>>
>>>> 2) save space inside the camera. I don't know how much room the LCD
>>>> takes up, but I'm sure it takes up some. Do away with the LCD  
>>>> and you
>>>> can make a smaller camera body. Or better yet, allocate that  
>>>> space to
>>>> sensor electronics. (Apart for the M8 place more emphasis on a good
>>>> viewfinder. Heck, on many a P&P the LCD has replaced the  
>>>> viewfinder). On
>>>> the M8 I'm sure having an LCD meant having a fatter camera.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Longer battery life. That's not a big issue, but it could be in
>>>> certain circumstances. Sure I can turn off the LCD. But it's still
>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>> 4) Longer camera life. Might the LCD be the first thing to go?  
>>>> OK, so I
>>>> might be reaching here. I guess we don't really look at cameras  
>>>> long
>>>> term today.
>>>>
>>>> 5) Less fear of pressing nose up to back of camera. No explanation
>>>> needed.
>>>>
>>>> OK, I'm sure by now everyone is saying that we still need access  
>>>> to the
>>>> menu. After all we've got options to deal with. A simple shutter  
>>>> speed
>>>> dial and aperture ring may have been satisfactory way back when,  
>>>> but now
>>>> we need to toggle through a thousand and one configuration choices.
>>>> Today a simple situation calls for
>>>> "Shades-Down-Red-22-Right-Bleed-Dive-Trips-All-Go" when yester- 
>>>> year the
>>>> most complex situation we had to deal with called for
>>>> "Sunny-16-and-Hail-Mary"?
>>>>
>>>> The ability to immediately see results has detracted from the  
>>>> discipline
>>>> it takes to make sure we get it right in the first place.
>>>> "Polaroid-like-instant-view-ability" is very
>>>> un-"Leica-M-and-the-decisive-moment"-like.
>>>>
>>>> For those who absolutely must have a preview device here's the  
>>>> solution.
>>>> Leica could have offered an LCD as an accessory. Not on the  
>>>> camera, but
>>>> a small monitor you could put in your pocket. It would have its own
>>>> battery pack, control buttons, and it would easily plug into the  
>>>> M8.
>>>> Best of all, just like bright-line finders it could easily be  
>>>> misplaced
>>>> allowing Leica yet another source of ongoing revenue. Someone on  
>>>> the
>>>> selling side obviously didn't think through all the advantages.
>>>>
>>>> daveR
>>>>




Replies: Reply from s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] A digital camera without.....)
In reply to: Message from s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] A digital camera without.....)