PLAMBERT

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Works as a none
Joined on Oct 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

TFD: The difference here is that one of these cameras is more or less pocketable. The other is not. If you are going to carry a camera on a strap or in a bag in might just as well be a DLSR which would take better pictures and be cheaper...

You could consider buying an Olympus or a Panasonic M4/3. Much better results than from my Sony RX100 IV that I sold (when disappointed with the success rate).
M4/3 cameras are readily available on the used market, sometimes quite cheap.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 10:45 UTC
On article Shooting with a used DSLR kit that cost me just $80 (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

CCD FTW: I'm downgrading a lot of my gear to old also-rans because I think a couple of years ago we reached a point (for many categories) of sufficiency. I no longer want to wring out every last bit of DR or add some more AF points or whatever. I couldn't be happier.

Recently bought an A99, 24MP FF with everything I could really need. I got a handful of lenses for it including 20mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 28mm f2, 50mm f1.4 and 70-200mm f4, all stabilised (of course), that setup cost me about $800 USD. Does a $3.5k 5D IV beat it? Probably, who cares?

I now shoot a C100 for video, rather than trying to get an all-singing 'hybrid' that inevitably falls flat in some area. These were expensive but now they are IMO incredible value. I also picked up an uber cheap 70D with 50mm f1.4 for a couple hundred USD, that just happens to share lenses with C100, it is a fine, basic DSLR.

I find it much easier to forgive this cheaper gear of their flaws for the money I outlay. Got off the upgrade hamster wheel.

I was surprised how good the results are from my Olympus OM10 mk2, remaindered off now it is so out of date. You might expect M4/3 results to be noticeably worse than APC but they aren't. The menus do take a lot of learning.
I later added a couple of used lenses at half new price, very sharp, altogether a light holiday camera outfit.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 10:12 UTC
In reply to:

Jack76: Yeah, it's nice to spend money on the world's most expensive lens. But I believe that those expensive lenses are over rated. I've seen some results where other less expensive lenses were as good or better.

On my full frame camera I have used a modern 90mm f2.5 Summarit and a much cheaper 1950s 90mm f4 Elmar. The modern expensive lens produced images that were sharper than the old lens but the difference could hardly be noticed on a 23inch monitor unless magnified up. The modern lens was more contrasty but P'shop will bring up contrast. I did not think it was worth nine times the price of the earlier lens so I sold it. My standard 40mm Summicron is cheap these days but it's a good lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2017 at 11:32 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: A film camera does need to sport 135 format frame to be a good, pocketable film camera. 135 format is odd, in truth unsuitable for a film camera when entire film infrastructure is a shadow of its past. 135 is a detriment even in digital world. Its awkward 3:2 frame was taken as acceptable in times when everything was recorded on film and nobody asked about the cost of film, or size, because it was used by the motion picture industry. But optically, legacy of that format only brings problems. Lens designs for that elongated format must be bigger than necessary, and more corrected than the lenses for 4:3 frame format. That means heavier and cameras too must be bigger. Everything about 135 format is sheer clumsiness users do not really need.

It is SLR lenses that tend to be big. My 35mm Minox has a tiny lens despite the 24x36mm format. Voigtlander 15mm, 21mm and 25mm lenses for Leica are small, as are the recent 28mm Leica f2.8, the 1970s 40mm f2 and the recent
50mm f2.8.
M4/3 is fine and the digital images stand a lot of enlargement. Would a half-frame film image be as good?

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: "...banking on the fact that Leica is perceived as a luxury brand versus other big camera companies like Nikon and Canon."

Only in yesteryears. Today, the above sentence needs to have "luxury" replaced with "overpriced and niche" to make sense.

Are you thinking of the re-badged Panasonic "Leicas"? The M9,M240,M10 are something else. Have you used one?
Phil

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 08:33 UTC
In reply to:

J Parker: Some of us are hesitant about any lens that isn't auto focus.

A while back, I observed old footage of photographers shooting Muhammad Ali. Although all the photographers had were manual focus lenses, not only were they focusing at lightning speed, they were focusing as if the lens was a natural extension of their hands (think of a piano player playing hundreds of notes without looking at the keys). I realized that if you've handled, focused and adjusted a lens hundreds of times, the lens became so intuitive that you could literally compose and focus as if it were second nature.

Although I was pretty content with my AF glass, I decided to try shooting manual focus exclusively. At first it was an extremely slow process -- and then I crossed a point where without zone focusing, I could follow and shoot even rapidly moving subjects with no issues. Yes, I mean no missed shots.

Develop the skill and learn the nuances of a MF lens. It will take your photography to another level.

All the lenses that fit my Leica M are manual focus. It means I have to focus deliberately by rangefinder before each picture or focus by scale and guess the distance. You learn to be careful.
To have autofocus would be handy but it won't happen on Leica M cameras.

On the other hand, my M4/3 camera s are all autofocus and sometimes only the wrong part of the image is in focus.

Philip

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 17:07 UTC
In reply to:

PLAMBERT: My Leica M240 was bought used and after a few months the rangefinder cam was out of adjustment (90mm would not focus infinity). Leica said the camera was under 2 years old and so fixed it for nothing including a general check and the latest firmware.
Would Sony do the same, or Nikon?
Philip

So the 2 year warranty applies to any camera, no matter how many owners it had had? Where is that law written?

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 18:03 UTC

My Leica M240 was bought used and after a few months the rangefinder cam was out of adjustment (90mm would not focus infinity). Leica said the camera was under 2 years old and so fixed it for nothing including a general check and the latest firmware.
Would Sony do the same, or Nikon?
Philip

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 13:38 UTC as 13th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: Hmmm. I'm, an Ex View Camera shooter who owns Sigma Merrill’s and this makes me re think my workflow... It’s still show up at dawn, shoot at ISO 100, use a big heavy tripod, use a cable release, and pray for no wind...... now without the clunky workflow. Well Done Sigma. Many bloggers have postulated about DNG in Camera and only Sigma has the courage to do this for cameras most of us can afford.

I get Jpegs and DNGs out of a Leica; don't really use the jpegs as the raw files are easily processed by P'shop Elements 15. It's amazing how much detail can be recovered from deep shadows or washed-out highlights in the same file. Pity about the prices of the hardware: although old lenses are often very good the bodies need to be recent.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: Hey, you didn't even show us a picture of the lens. As to image quality, the Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pancake is two stops faster and much better for a little over a hundred bucks.

EF-S lenses don't cover full frame so they can be smaller.
PLL

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 18:03 UTC
On article Re-make/Re-model: Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 Samples (197 comments in total)

Some interesting pictures here but the corners seem less than sharp in the two Raw images I opened up. I think the current small 28mm f2.8 makes more sense; certainly its images would be sharper at f5.6 than from this new lens and not vignetted.
Leica's marketing strategy is very strange at times..
Philip

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 17:22 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

ybizzle: "...real collector’s item" lol...They must be mistaking themselves for Leica! ;)

I can buy a used black 40mm f2 Summicron for less than these colourful upstarts........ I wonder which would give sharper images, more gradual bokeh..?

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 10:33 UTC
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: Olympus/Panny need to make a m4/3 version of the Leica rangefinder with three really nice manual focus only f/1.7 15mm, 20mm and 42.5mm lenses. The single window optical viewfinder could just have a manual focus confirmation LED. Should be easy with a phase detect spot meter looking at a mirror on the focal plane shutter. The body should cost $600.00 and each lens about $300.00.

Sort of a digital version of the Leica CL.

Tedolph

Are Olympus bodies better built than Panasonic M43.? I used a succession of Panasonic bodies, which never broke physically ever but they all felt fragile. My GF7 will not operate the touch screen. The Olympus 9-18mm works on that camera (no anti-shake) and is good for interiors but it too feels fragile. Leica equipment doesn't. I have lenses from 1959 to 2005 (from £90 upwards) and everything works as it should.
Phil

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 20:57 UTC
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (487 comments in total)

Barney, this is copied from Leica Rumors
"Update on my last Leica M10 camera Q&A post regarding the missing spirit level/virtual horizon: I received several confirmations that Leica will put back this feature in one of the upcoming M10 firmware updates (probably will not be part of the upcoming 1.0.2.0)."
"Update: I received some conflicting information on this rumour, so we should see if this will happen."

No doubt Leica will sort it out.
On another topic, the rangefinder of my secondhand M240 would not focus infinity with 90mm and 135mm lenses and Leica (London) sent it back to the factory who fixed it for nothing, as well as updating the firmware. Very nice of them.
Phil

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 19:52 UTC as 95th comment | 3 replies
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: Olympus/Panny need to make a m4/3 version of the Leica rangefinder with three really nice manual focus only f/1.7 15mm, 20mm and 42.5mm lenses. The single window optical viewfinder could just have a manual focus confirmation LED. Should be easy with a phase detect spot meter looking at a mirror on the focal plane shutter. The body should cost $600.00 and each lens about $300.00.

Sort of a digital version of the Leica CL.

Tedolph

Same build quality?

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 19:48 UTC
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (487 comments in total)

You ask about a horizon level in the M10. My M240 has one in Live-view (pressing menu buttons) so there will be one in the M10. It isn't as good as on my Panasonic GX7.
Although I mostly use 21mm to 50mm lenses I am starting to use a 1958 Elmar f4 90mm, which is surprisingly sharp from f5.6. For close work I experiment with a Minolta 35-105mm zoom having macro at 105mm only. Limited useful range but very sharp too. Often I use a 40mm Summicron, which I can recommend as being better at f2.8 than a modern f2.5 35mm Summarit (since sold!)
The raw files are very resilient: it is surprising how you can get an acceptable picture out of an "obvious failure" using P Elements 15. Problems I experienced using an M240? Camera shake sometimes, forgetting to focus, having the wrong lens in the camera!
I recommend an M240 if you can do without auto focus. Whether the improvements of the M10 are worth £5600 is up to you.
Philip

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 16:34 UTC as 112th comment | 1 reply
On article Throwback Thursday: Minolta's prosumer DiMAGE 7 (214 comments in total)
In reply to:

jeffcpix: The A2 was the last and best version. Two auxilliary lenses were available a tele which gave 300mm at 2,8 and a wide which was about 21mm -- both were big, heavy and inconvenient -- but they were the best aux lenses I've ever used. If Sony were to re-issue this camera with the latest/greatest sensor, OLED EVF and RAW+jpg I'd be interested. Unfortunately 'the mind of Minolta' didn't seem to be part of the Sony organization's inheritance -- groundbreaking designs like the Minolta Spot Meters, Color Temp Meter and Beseler/Minota 45A were abandoned. People forget that before Sony teamed up with Zeiss, Minolta had a fruitful relationship with Leica.

I had a Leica CL also a Minolta CLE that followed it and was better. Both cameras felt flimsy compared with a Leica M4P I bought next but I don't believe the results were better. Minolta 40mm and 90mm lenses were either made by Leica or designed by Leica and made in Japan; no difference in quality. I have still have the 40mm today and it performs better than the modern f2.5 Summarit I bought lately and sold soon after. Incidentally some old Leica lenses are remarkably sharp on an M9 and an M240.
Phil

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

Cameracist: Wonder how it works on Sony a7...

Actually some Leica lenses are retrofocus.
See Erwin Puts on 21mm Elmarit M:- "This lens is the first retrofocus design by Leica for the M body"
Problems arise on M9 and M240 with Voigtlander wide-angle lenses due to the close proximity of their rear elements to the sensor surface,causing the rays forming the corners of the image to reach the sensor at an acute angle.. This did not matter so much on film cameras, although vignetting might have been present..
The Perar lenses are very interesting but the prices / rarity put them out of reach.
Phil

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 18:02 UTC
In reply to:

Photoman: Would rather have a CV 15mm III.

The CV15mm is the smallest of my M-bay lenses; cost about £300. Vignetting on my M240 is not heavy and is easily fixed in PS Elements 15 or Cornerfix with a bit more effort (it also deals with edge coloration).
The real advantage of the MS lenses is minimal weight. If the prices made more sense I would be interested. I suspect that the resolution is not up to Leica standards but have seen no data.
Phil.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 20:51 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Cockerell: For the 65mm "macro", where are they measuring the minimum focus distance from? If it's the focal plane, as is usual, then the magnification will be 0.43 (1:2.3), far short of a true 1:1 macro. That's actually the best case. If they're measuring it from, say an effective lens plane about halfway through the lens, the magnification will be around close to 0.31 (1:3.2). To be a true macro lens, the minimum focal distance would need to be 0.26m or less (4x the focal length). I always thought that if a lens mentioned "macro" in its name, then it's a true macro lens.

I had several macro lenses in film days that would work closer using extension rings. I now have a Minolta 35-70mm with a zoom setting at 70mm which works well adapted to a Leica M and permits extension rings if desired.
A point of interest is that macro lenses if of longer focal length than the standard lens might permit a greater distance between the front glass and the subject, so allowing light to get to the subject. Perspective might improve as well.
Phil

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 12:39 UTC
Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »