Ron, nice icicles shots.
Ryan, nice set and colors, like the cart shots best.
Luka, have you considered replacing the 75Cron and 90CronV3 with a 90Cron AA?
joakim wrote:
You have the 35 Cron IV as well don\'t you? Do you find them very different to work with?
Very different look depending on subject. But right now I\'m using the 35Lux more because of the additional stop of light. Even on film, the 35Lux is much sharper over the 35CronIV. I like the 35Lux ASPH for this \"trendy\" modern look and sharpness. However, the 35CronIV is a no slouch. It has that imperfect Leica \"glow\" (flare + CA?) and the color rendering is \"different\". I still prefer the softer look of the older 35CronIV (and my 50CronV3) for portraits. To me, in \"denoir\" speak, the 35CronIV is akin to The Impressionist while the 35Lux ASPH is more like the Dutch Masters (This is my own opinion and subjective).
denoir wrote:
Looking around at the Leica blog and its featured gallery, something that I\'ve noticed before struck me. It seems like there is a certain approved style of photography with M gear.
To me, the Leica M has a legacy linked to capturing many of the great moments in photography over the past Century with a small unobtrusive camera (and partly because SLRs were not widely available until the 1960s). For example, many of these photographers were from Magnum or other agencies and were shooting for LIFE, Stern, etc. I guess from a marketing standpoint, Leica is drawing on its strength and knows its target audience, a small well built unobtrusive digital camera for keen amateurs or pros who are more into into the \"art\" or documentary photography. This is in contrast to the majority of Canonikon shooters who are mostly into wildlife, sports, studio and family snapshots.
BTW, my favorite Canon shooter is James Nachtwey, go look him up book \"Inferno\" or the documentary \"War Photographer\", highly recommended.
Ron, nice icicles shots.
Ryan, nice set and colors, like the cart shots best.
Luka, have you considered replacing the 75Cron and 90CronV3 with a 90Cron AA?
joakim wrote:
You have the 35 Cron IV as well don\'t you? Do you find them very different to work with?
Very different look depending on subject. But right now I\'m using the 35Lux more because of the additional stop of light. Even on film, the 35Lux is much sharper over the 35CronIV. I like the 35Lux ASPH for this \"trendy\" modern look and sharpness. However, the 35CronIV is a no slouch. It has that imperfect Leica \"glow\" (flare + CA?) and the color rendering is \"different\". I still prefer the softer look of the older 35CronIV (and my 50CronV3) for portraits. To me, in \"denoir\" speak, the 35CronIV is akin to The Impressionist while the 35Lux ASPH is more like the Dutch Masters (This is my own opinion and subjective).
denoir wrote:
Looking around at the Leica blog and its featured gallery, something that I\'ve noticed before struck me. It seems like there is a certain approved style of photography with M gear.
To me, the Leica M has a legacy linked to capturing many of the great moments in photography over the past Century with a small unobtrusive camera (and partly because SLRs were not widely available until the 1960s). For example, many of these photographers were from Magnum or other agencies and were shooting for LIFE, Stern, etc. I guess from a marketing standpoint, Leica is drawing on its strength and knows its target audience, a small well built unobtrusive digital camera for keen amateurs or pros who are more into into the \"art\" or documentary photography. This is in contrast to the majority of Canonikon shooters who are mostly into wildlife, sports, studio and family snapshots.
BTW, my favorite Canon shooter is James Nachtwey, go look up him book \"Inferno\" or the documentary \"War Photographer\", highly recommended.
