Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/10/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]To say nothing of depth of field. All other things being equal, with a normal-length lens, in poor light, I'd rather shoot at: f/2.8 and 1/50 at 4000 ISO -than- f/1.4 and 1/30 at 640 ISO. The other night, I did a photo shoot for a sports industry magazine, with relatively static subjects, in poor light. I did it with an M8 and a 35mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH. At the end of it, I would have traded that setup (perhaps permanently) for a D3 and even an f/2.8 lens. In low light (no flash possible), shooting even those relatively still subjects, a "fantastic fast" lens was an ordeal. I ended up ditching most of the files because at screen size, they had very little that was in focus. It wasn't missing the focus on the intended subject. The problem with fast lenses is that the depth of field is microscopic wide-open (and with a camera with underdeveloped ISO capability and no VR, you do have to shoot wide-open). Unless you like the razor-thin- focus aesthetic (or it can be adapted for your subject), it just doesn't work. Note to many amateur Noctilux/Summilux 75 owners: you might think it works for your picture, but it doesn't. In the end, who cares about how sharp a Leica lens is if it's only sharp in some tiny part of the picture? And I don't think average viewers see that sharp part or care that in that 2mm circle on the frame, the lens is resolving 90 lp/mm. What they see instead is a picture that is mostly out of focus. When you consider that a D3's ISO 4000 is roughly comparable to the M8's 640, you can use much smaller apertures - as in 2-1/2 stops smaller. That means f/3.5 instead of f/1.4 - which translates directly into increased DOF (and more "normal" looking pictures). Alternatively, high ISO also gives you the opportunity to increase the shutter speed to avoid motion blur (as would have also been helpful the other night). Or you can split the difference. Dante On Oct 21, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Frank Filippone wrote: > With all due respect... when it is too dark, it is too dark. > > Higher ISO on digital cameras takes care of this..... > > Or... > > Would you rather shoot at ISO 100,000 at 1/250 of a second or a > Leica M8 or > M9 at 1/4 second at ASA 1250? > > Capturing an image with great lenses is only valid if you can > prevent camera > shake...... > > And no matter what you say, the Noctilux is only 1 stop faster than > common > F1.4 lenses.... 1 stop. Not a big deal. Higher useable ISO makes > up for > that in a big way..... > > The D3s is a real threat... and those that do not believe are fooling > themselves...... > > Remember, most of us are amateurs.... not pros... and selling > photographs is > only a dream//nightmare/imagination. > We don't have "rules". > > Frank Filippone > red735i at earthlink.net > > mehrdad wrote: >> i know with the m8 & m9 we are struggling with iso 1250, i guess >> when m12 > is >> out leica will catch up with todays canon >> >> > But we don't need 1250 with our fast Leica lenses. Would you rather > have 1250 iso and crappy lenses or 160 iso and fantastic lenses? I'd > rather have the fantastic fast lenses. > > Tina > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information