Made the Leap

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Godfrey Forum Pro • Posts: 29,509
Re: Made the Leap

Jozef M wrote:

Godfrey wrote:

NickDakota wrote:

Not necessarily true. Manual exposure is something that needs to be mastered to get it right. Even then it's still a work in progress. The Leica AE is only center weighted and takes some practice as well. I've been shooting Leica a long time along side other gear. It's not as simple of a transition as you make it IMO.

You're entitled to your own opinion, as long as you realize that it, like my statements as well, are just our own opinions.

I've been shooting with Leica LTM and M cameras since 1969, alongside scads of Nikons and others. Most of my Leica M cameras have not had any meter at all: I either guess exposure or use a hand-held incident meter, just as I do with all the other cameras. Easy as can be. Read the light, look at the scene, adjust the reading to suit, make exposure.

I pick up any one of my cameras based on the caprice of the moment, and they all essentially work the same way. It's one of the benefits of not being dependent upon whatever whiz bang features any one of them might contain...

G

So what is the only true scientific technical truth here?
Or do Leica M users only have vague opinions about the technical capabilities of their cameras ...

Jozef.

There is no scientific method that can accurately and absolutely gauge "ease of use" since that is dependent upon the user's knowledge, skills, preferences, and so forth. It is not objective data.

I find a Leica M4-2 to be supremely easy to use. Other can't deal with the fact it has no meter at all, is manual focus, manual exposure, manual wind and rewind, etc. The M4-2 simply takes knowledge and experience to use easily ... which I have. There is nothing about a "technical capability" that it lacks, unless for you convenience/automation features like autofocus, auto exposure, auto rewind, etc etc, are an essential to getting the photos you want.

If you want to compare technical capabilities, well, the M10 goes beyond the M4-2 (disregarding its automation features and the fact that one is digital capture and the other is film capture) in that it has a faster flash sync speed limit (which nets more control when using flash fill, etc), its shutter is capable of 1/4000 vs 1/1000 second (so it can provide more aperture flexibility in bright circumstances if you're using a fast lens), and its shutter can provide times exposures of up to 30 seconds duration, compared to 1 second (so it can be used more easily for capturing exposures in very low light and produce other effects due to long exposure times). The M10 is capable of metered flash operation through the lens, useful for macro work, and is also capable of Live View enabling TTL viewing and focusing with non RF coupled lenses, also useful for doing close up, macro, and telephoto work that the M4-2 is not particularly useful for without a range of awkward accessories.

These are objective comparisons of camera capabilities, not a discussion of automation conveniences which *sometimes* makes a camera easier to use, for some people/purposes, but often times add enough additional complexity that the end result is actually harder to use.

Ease of use is a much ballyhooed and often amazingly misunderstood thing...

G

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow