Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

FM Forum Rules
Wedding Resource List
  

FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
  

Archive 2013 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...
  
 
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


D. Diggler wrote:
Where were they falling down? Autofocus? High-ISO image quality?


I cannot really comment on the Olympus because I have only a little experience with it...
the Leica does not have AF and the high iso compared to other cameras is not that great.

THe new Leica M240 will wipe out all ISO problems and should be really amazing... if they ever become available.



Mar 03, 2013 at 04:37 AM
LivLif
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


hardlyboring wrote:
I just tell brides we use the best equipment for the job. I have never had anyone make a comment about my cameras or even ask for explanation about them. Even when I have my film cameras out people dont say anything.


Same here. Except for the UBs that know a little about cameras or what the latest cameras are. This year I have really simplified my kit. I am looking to carry less and do more with what I have. I used to carry everything and the kitchen sink. No mas!

I do plan to pick up an X100S this season. I'm really looking forward to using it as I LOVED my X100 when I owned one.



Mar 03, 2013 at 04:43 AM
TRReichman
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


I couldn't wait to get an M9, and I'm sure a few other people will disagree with me but I thought the image quality on the M9 sucked royally. I'd put it somewhere between the Canon 20D and original 5d in terms of IQ. you can buy those cameras for $500 or less today, I paid almost $5000 for the m9 - it just isn't worth it. I did love the simplicity (which is what I wanted) - I put my cameras in Manual, Single shot mode when I buy them and they never come out, so I don't use 90+% of the functions. The Leica was great for that level of simplicity, I just think it is egregiously overpriced compared to performance and I don't think their lenses are actually better than comparable Nikon or Canons that cost 1/10 the price. I'd own them only if I had ridiculous sums of idle cash because I'm just too business minded to justify it. If I'm spending $7K on a camera I'd rather buy a d4 instead of the new M240. Obviously, it doesn't autofocus and my eyesight isn't great. I'd love one for travel but I wouldn't want to pay more than $2k for it.

With respect to the OMD it is nice but the files don'e have the latitude that Nikon does and I don't like that the Panasonic lenses don't have in-camera adjustments since the Panasonics were the ones I wanted. I also realized that I simply like the mirror and I don't like composing via EVF. Great camera but I realized that I don't need a portable, personal body like I thought I did. I also didn't see the point in investing in new lenses for a whole new system when I could just spend less and have greater performance on nikon lenses. Really didn't suit me for weddings so I recently sold mine. I'm sticking with standard Nikons for now and not trying to differentiate myself through gear.

- trr



Mar 03, 2013 at 04:47 AM
D. Diggler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


TRReichman wrote:
With respect to the OMD it is nice but the files don'e have the latitude that Nikon does


I've heard you better nail exposure with the OMD; there's not much leeway to fix it in post.



Mar 03, 2013 at 05:31 AM
D. Diggler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


TRReichman wrote:
I simply like the mirror and I don't like composing via EVF.


Took a few shots through an EVF once and don't know if I could get use to it. It's "different". A different view.



Mar 03, 2013 at 05:34 AM
TRReichman
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


With the modern sensors we're used to a few stops of latitude in either direction. The OMD really doesn't have the shadow detail or highlight recovery. Not that it is a bad camera, but it isn't as robust as what you're used to. Great little personal/travel camera if you need one and don't get too spendy with the lenses.

- trr



Mar 03, 2013 at 05:36 AM
TRReichman
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


D. Diggler wrote:
Took a few shots through an EVF once and don't know if I could get use to it. It's "different". A different view.


Yeah, I would have thought I would love it (previewing exposure in VF and all) but I found it oddly awkward. I wanted to love the Fuji's and I do in many ways but their OVF is a joke and the EVF just doesn't suit me. I don't mind being boring with gear I guess.

- trr



Mar 03, 2013 at 05:39 AM
asparkes
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


I completely see where these camera are not for everyone. And I don't expect there are going to replace the do-it-all versatility of a DSLR too soon. I've found neither the Fuji's, NEX, or the Olympus to produce a file that is anywhere near as forgiving as my 5DMKIII ... or MKII for that matter. That said, I'm not really a pixel peeper and -- at this stage in the game -- if I blew an exposure that bad, the file is probably not making out of my Photo Mechanic cull. Different strokes for different folks. I just think the fact that this is a conversation at all lately is a testament to how far the mirrorless word has come along. Hell, especially m43 ... I can't believe how much I like the OM-D .. I'd have poo poo'd the idea of Micro Four Thirds 18 months ago. Great times to be a shooter ... if your wallet can stand it :-)


Mar 03, 2013 at 06:09 AM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


Todd -- you thought the M9 files were that bad?! I actually quite liked them compared with my D3 files. Not quite as robust but the sharpness of the M mount lenses is stupid compared to Canon or NIkon.

I have a M (240) ordered but am extremely frustrated about the lack of info about availability and everything else. Some say soon, some say a year. The M address a lot of the short comings of the M9 and IMO is the first heavy use digital Leica made. It is totally egregiously priced but the fact that you can set it on single, set the ISO, and go with true RF capabilities is fantastic.

I do not want to get an M9 because the M is really what I have been looking for but I have a feeling that the M will not be available any time soon and I need it for wedding season.



Mar 03, 2013 at 06:23 AM
TRReichman
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


I thought the m9 files were horrible. Awful color, the white balance didn't even out for shit. Garbage ISO performance. I didn't like anything about the files. If I'm spending $7k it is going to be on my personal life and not a camera. Just wait till you have to send that camera in to have the RF aligned regularly. Having said that, it sounds like the 240 is shipping now.

- trr



Mar 03, 2013 at 06:38 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



D. Diggler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


hardlyboring wrote:
I have a M (240) ordered


The CMOS Leica. Files should look more like Canikon now.



Mar 03, 2013 at 06:39 AM
flash
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


D. Diggler wrote:
What do you tell them as to the "why"?


I tell them that I don't want me or my cameras to be the centre of attention. I tell them that my little Leicas let them be the centre of attention. I tell them my Leicas make it easy for people to ignore me and let me get in closer than I could with a big DSLR. Then I point out a 50 inch print on the studio walls.

Also my shooting partner does carry a pair of 1 series bodies. But he shoots almost exclusively candidly and from a distance. But the couples don't usually meet him until we arrive. Interestingly a couple of weeks ago we had a guest approach me and ask me when I had turned up. He hadn't actually noticed there was two of us there. He had noticed the guy with the 1Ds2 and 1D4 roaming around but not the one with the EM5 crouched at the front of the aisle... Honestly that's true.

I know this is a perception topic but the quality thing has been broached. For the EM5. Currently it has more DR than any Canon camera except the 5D3 and 1Dx. That includes the 5D2, 7D and 1DS3. The files may look thinner but the headroom is just silly. Shadows aren't as strong as my old 5D2 but at least there's no banding. And with the EVF it's actually difficult to screw up an exposure. Nikons have more DR with their Sony sensors but it's not as much as you might think and you need to spend many times the price of an EM5 to get it.

The M9 is probably one of the most flawed cameras ever made if you compare it to cameras released around the same time. But if you like working within the thin band where it works in it's unbeleivable. No CCD camera is a high ISO champion, including MF backs. So I don't know why people expect the M9 to be different. Plus I shoot at F1.0. I don't need anything over about ISO 640. AT base ISO the detail and accutace is like nothing I've ever seen in a 35mm sensor. And in my opinion the glass is so much better than anything Canon makes. I've owned most of the L primes to 135mm and none of them compare to the Leica equivalent, except maybe the 85L. It's never been my style to shoot in total darkness and want to produce light noisless files. I've never used CAF on any of my cameras at a wedding. I don't shoot video, except of the kids and I shoot 90% primes. And I can focus an M9 more accurately and faster than a 5D2 in a dim reception.

A CCD rangefinder with no AF, centre weighted metering, no macro, no zooms and no automation is the wrong camera for 95% of photographers. For the vast majority a DSLR is a better choice. But there's always the 5%.

Gordon



Mar 03, 2013 at 11:30 AM
flash
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


hardlyboring wrote:
Todd -- you thought the M9 files were that bad?! I actually quite liked them compared with my D3 files. Not quite as robust but the sharpness of the M mount lenses is stupid compared to Canon or NIkon.

I have a M (240) ordered but am extremely frustrated about the lack of info about availability and everything else. Some say soon, some say a year. The M address a lot of the short comings of the M9 and IMO is the first heavy use digital Leica made. It is totally egregiously priced but the fact that you can set
...Show more

they started shipping today. It depends on how far down the list you are. It might be a good idea to put yourself on a few lists although I don't think it will be as bad as the M9 was. Leica weren't ready for that at all.

Gordon



Mar 03, 2013 at 11:32 AM
canerino
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


"Badassness" does not come from the camera you have on your shoulder.


Mar 03, 2013 at 01:38 PM
Eyeball
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


The good news for you guys is that the definition of "pro camera" in the eyes of most consumers is quickly becoming "anything but a cell phone".


Mar 03, 2013 at 02:22 PM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


Gordon
I am on a few lists and have been for a while now. Dale photo, BH, Amazon.... their first shipments were 1 camera.
I was told by Dale photo that it could be over a year until I would get the 240. BH was a little more optimistic at 6 months but by that time half my weddings will be over.
I really do not want to buy an M9 ... chances are if I do not get the M240 in a few months I will just abandon the idea and wait till next year. No sense in making bad business decisions.



Mar 03, 2013 at 02:25 PM
D. Diggler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


flash wrote:
they started shipping today


You're not concerned about the switch to CMOS?



Mar 03, 2013 at 03:11 PM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


D. Diggler wrote:
You're not concerned about the switch to CMOS?

why does the Cmos matter? if Leica is actually silly enough to think that by using a CCD sensor people will get better and more film like results then they are crazy. Its digital not film. Someone did not have their head on straight when the CCD development contract was signed the first time. This time they at least looked at what the market was doing and played ball. Prelim results say the only sensor better is the D800. We shall see. At least they have a legit player this time ... even though it is stupidly priced.



Mar 03, 2013 at 03:25 PM
asparkes
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


canerino wrote:
"Badassness" does not come from the camera you have on your shoulder.


Couldn't agree more, but I think the bigger question is do your clients "see" that differently? Haha not to drag to post back to my original intent or anything. I'm rather enjoying Doug's mirrorless musings, I think he and I have a similar fondness for the tech.



Mar 03, 2013 at 06:12 PM
canerino
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Mirrorless, and not looking like a badass ...


asparkes wrote:
Couldn't agree more, but I think the bigger question is do your clients "see" that differently? Haha not to drag to post back to my original intent or anything. I'm rather enjoying Doug's mirrorless musings, I think he and I have a similar fondness for the tech.



I dont think so.

A photographer who is in command/confident/sharp could wear a point and shoot around their neck. I really feel like so much is made about smaller cameras being more discreet. My experience is that the size of the camera used is a really small part of the equation. OWN whatever camera you are toting and you'll be fine.



Mar 03, 2013 at 07:29 PM
1      
2
       3       4       end




FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password