rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.7 #15 · Leica the only Digital Rangefinder? | |
Red 90 wrote:
The M9 is basically a mechanical rangefinder camera fitted with a full frame sensor. No bells or whistles. It can't shoot high iso, high frames, track wildlife or sports. It's a simple camera with a sensor that is on par with last generations dslr sensors.
I have to somewhat disagree with you on the highlighted points... in part because it seems like you're buying into what all the spec sheet reading pundits prognosticate. True, the M9's high ISO performance is not as clean as current cameras out of the box. OK, some of that is due to older tech, but it's also because Leica applies basically zero NR to the files. That's also what Canon *used* to do, for example with the first 1D, IIRC. The 1DX, with its default NR settings will create SOOC JPEGs that look like they were shot through a shower curtain. Sure, less noise, but also less fine image detail. Same with the Sonys (I've used the 5N and a77 at higher ISOs - RAW files with minimal luminance NR have plenty of granularity). With the M9 it's up to the individual to tailor a suitable NR solution, which offers more control. All the major brands currently remove some of that control from the photographer in exchange for convenience (and more impressive spec sheet performance). Yes, the M9's high ISO performance could be better, but it's not quite the unusable disaster many make it out to be.
Wildlife and sports: It seems the assumption is one needs a 500mm lens and the subject is always moving. But, there have been some really impressive sports images made with wider angle lenses. OK, I'm not going to use an M9 for most football action photos, but I do use an M9 at football games. Unfortunately I don't have any of those photos handy... As for wildlife:
28mm:
http://ronscheffler.com/samples/fmm9/20120922/20120922_0153.jpg
50mm:
http://ronscheffler.com/samples/fmm9/20120922/20120922_0054.jpg
Maybe this is not typical of 'wildlife' as deer are practically as tame as house pets in my area. But, what am I going to do when I only have a bag with 21/28/50 and 90mm lenses along and I want to photograph some animals? I needed to figure out a way to get closer, which I did. Actually, this was what made getting these photos a fun challenge and is generally what I enjoy about the Leica - sometimes I have to do a bit of work and thinking to get the photo. I could have stood back with my Canon and 400 or 600mm lens on the 1DX at 12 fps, but that's easy.
It's an aspect of the Leica that I enjoy a lot - taking the common wisdom of what it *can't* do and figuring out ways to work around that...
Red 90 wrote:
I know leica has a premium, but even in the days of rangefinder film cameras, there were cheaper alternatives like minolta, canon, yashica. If you wanted to get into photography back then, you didn't have to pay the entry price of a leica.
Unfortunately the rangefinder era is long gone. Yes, cost of admission for a digital rangefinder body is high... but if that is what you want and you're willing to spend that money, some of the legacy glass is not all that expensive. Canon RF lenses, for example, or current Voigtlander. Maybe at the pixel level those won't match modern Leica glass, but on the whole, many are not that far off and in some respects might actually produce more interesting images.
|
It only took a couple of weeks and I became a convert.