DPR Forum
Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.
DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!
M
mike_nunan
Hi Dave,
I'm an amateur mainly interested in informal/reportage style stuff, 80% people with a bit of "scenic" (if you can apply that word to the UK cities where I usually find myself shooting ;o) so I guess my requirements are roughly similar to yours. I have an RTS II with a collection of three AE lenses, 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4. I recently took the plunge into Leica M, with an old used M6 and a couple of fairly fresh lenses, the 35/2 ASPH and the 50/2. I wouldn't argue with Marc's recommendations over the faster lenses, but I wanted something compact and also didn't want to spend the money for the f/1.4 glass. I can carry the M plus the RTS with one lens (typically the 85 but sometimes the 35) in a compact Billingham satchel. I like having two bodies, as it gives me options over film choice. For ex&le, if I know I'm going to be indoors a while, I'll load something fast into one of the bodies (often the Contax) and usually have Astia in the other.
I find the Zeiss 50 and 85 to be crackingly sharp at f/2.8 and beyond, but at f/2 they can't compete with the Leica. Of course, there is another stop to play with if circumstances absolutely require it, and the soft-focus look of these lenses at full aperture is an attractive effect in its own right. The 35/1.4 is one of the world's great lenses. I tested it back to back against the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH and the difference was marginal -- certainly not worth the 100% difference in the used price. Albert, I got mine (an AE in fine condition) for GBP395 and I've seen them regularly at around that price, which IMO is an absolute steal considering how good a lens it is. And they don't make an N-mount version?! Go figure.
For the kind of stuff I shoot, manual wind is preferable because I don't need the frame rate and motor shriek is an intrusion. There's also the perception that anything with manual wind is a quaint old-fashioned camera, which can help set strangers at ease. Given those parameters, the RTS II has to be the best SLR body available. It gives you exactly what you need and no more; the meter is sensitive and accurate, the AE lock switch is a delight, the viewfinder is excellent (get a grid screen if you intend to stick with the fast primes) and the body itself is beautifully built but compact. I don't miss the P or Tv modes and I save money by going for AE rather than MM lenses. I paid just GBP225 for my RTS II, and although it's in decent nick I will probably try to get hold of a really good one within the next year or two, before they start getting rare. This is a camera I will probably ask to be buried with!
Regarding Leica bodies, I bought the M6 a few months ago thinking that I would replace it with an M7 if I decided to stick with the M-series. In fact, I was in a shop on Saturday looking at an M7, and I think I will wait for the next AE-equipped model before I part with that kind of cash. The main irritation with the M7 is the film speed dial lacks any kind of lock, and can shift while the camera is in the bag. Also, the battery cover on the M7 is notorious for coming loose. Bizarrely I don't miss the AE with the M6, even though there's no way I'd consider a full manual SLR body, and I can't quite make out why this is. Perhaps it's just because the controls are so easy to use with the camera raised that the meter-and-adjust operation takes no longer than the meter-lock-recompose approach that I use with with aperture priority auto bodies. Plus, if I did have AE, I'd want a better AE lock than the M7's three-position shutter button provides (cf. the rotating switch on the RTS II).
To put this into perspective, I also own a very full Canon system, with a 1v body and eight or so lenses. Ok so maybe I'm still in the honeymoon phase with the Leica, but the fact remains that the Canon has seen hardly any use in the last three months. I'm not about to sell it, because it still has its uses, but as an everyday system for informal work, the M6/RTS2 combo is "it". BTW I also have an Olympus OM4Ti (too many cameras, I know!) which many people rave about as being the best ever MF SLR body, but I'd take the RTS II any day of the week, and that's even before we've started talking about the lenses. That Oly is probably the thing that will get sold first if I decide to have an equipment cull.
Lynn, sorry to hear that you're leaving here, but I can fully understand it, I just spent 40 mins typing the above when I should have been doing other things! But I must add my voice to those who've said you'll be missed around here, and I hope to run into you again online. Meanwhile please feel free to drop me a direct mail anytime if there's anything you think I might be able to help you with.
TTFN
-= mike =-
I'm an amateur mainly interested in informal/reportage style stuff, 80% people with a bit of "scenic" (if you can apply that word to the UK cities where I usually find myself shooting ;o) so I guess my requirements are roughly similar to yours. I have an RTS II with a collection of three AE lenses, 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4. I recently took the plunge into Leica M, with an old used M6 and a couple of fairly fresh lenses, the 35/2 ASPH and the 50/2. I wouldn't argue with Marc's recommendations over the faster lenses, but I wanted something compact and also didn't want to spend the money for the f/1.4 glass. I can carry the M plus the RTS with one lens (typically the 85 but sometimes the 35) in a compact Billingham satchel. I like having two bodies, as it gives me options over film choice. For ex&le, if I know I'm going to be indoors a while, I'll load something fast into one of the bodies (often the Contax) and usually have Astia in the other.
I find the Zeiss 50 and 85 to be crackingly sharp at f/2.8 and beyond, but at f/2 they can't compete with the Leica. Of course, there is another stop to play with if circumstances absolutely require it, and the soft-focus look of these lenses at full aperture is an attractive effect in its own right. The 35/1.4 is one of the world's great lenses. I tested it back to back against the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH and the difference was marginal -- certainly not worth the 100% difference in the used price. Albert, I got mine (an AE in fine condition) for GBP395 and I've seen them regularly at around that price, which IMO is an absolute steal considering how good a lens it is. And they don't make an N-mount version?! Go figure.
For the kind of stuff I shoot, manual wind is preferable because I don't need the frame rate and motor shriek is an intrusion. There's also the perception that anything with manual wind is a quaint old-fashioned camera, which can help set strangers at ease. Given those parameters, the RTS II has to be the best SLR body available. It gives you exactly what you need and no more; the meter is sensitive and accurate, the AE lock switch is a delight, the viewfinder is excellent (get a grid screen if you intend to stick with the fast primes) and the body itself is beautifully built but compact. I don't miss the P or Tv modes and I save money by going for AE rather than MM lenses. I paid just GBP225 for my RTS II, and although it's in decent nick I will probably try to get hold of a really good one within the next year or two, before they start getting rare. This is a camera I will probably ask to be buried with!
Regarding Leica bodies, I bought the M6 a few months ago thinking that I would replace it with an M7 if I decided to stick with the M-series. In fact, I was in a shop on Saturday looking at an M7, and I think I will wait for the next AE-equipped model before I part with that kind of cash. The main irritation with the M7 is the film speed dial lacks any kind of lock, and can shift while the camera is in the bag. Also, the battery cover on the M7 is notorious for coming loose. Bizarrely I don't miss the AE with the M6, even though there's no way I'd consider a full manual SLR body, and I can't quite make out why this is. Perhaps it's just because the controls are so easy to use with the camera raised that the meter-and-adjust operation takes no longer than the meter-lock-recompose approach that I use with with aperture priority auto bodies. Plus, if I did have AE, I'd want a better AE lock than the M7's three-position shutter button provides (cf. the rotating switch on the RTS II).
To put this into perspective, I also own a very full Canon system, with a 1v body and eight or so lenses. Ok so maybe I'm still in the honeymoon phase with the Leica, but the fact remains that the Canon has seen hardly any use in the last three months. I'm not about to sell it, because it still has its uses, but as an everyday system for informal work, the M6/RTS2 combo is "it". BTW I also have an Olympus OM4Ti (too many cameras, I know!) which many people rave about as being the best ever MF SLR body, but I'd take the RTS II any day of the week, and that's even before we've started talking about the lenses. That Oly is probably the thing that will get sold first if I decide to have an equipment cull.
Lynn, sorry to hear that you're leaving here, but I can fully understand it, I just spent 40 mins typing the above when I should have been doing other things! But I must add my voice to those who've said you'll be missed around here, and I hope to run into you again online. Meanwhile please feel free to drop me a direct mail anytime if there's anything you think I might be able to help you with.
TTFN
-= mike =-
Mike, I have 2 M7s I use in the swirling world of wedding shoots. Never had the dial move or the battery cover come off despite in-and-out of the bag a zillion times a night.
I also am astounded that Contax doesn't offer the 35/1.4 for the N cameras.
While I love the Contax gear, I keep it only out of love for the Zeiss signature. The Canon 1v (film) and 1Ds (digital) are so fast in focusing in near dark conditions that the system is now my primary 35mm SLR for weddings. I've found the 35/1.4L to rival the Contax and the 135/2L to be unequalled (for the price of $800 new BTW).
Lynn, you will be sorely missed. You offered a gentle spirit and voice of reason here often. Did you not gain some good insights to make you time here of value?
I also am astounded that Contax doesn't offer the 35/1.4 for the N cameras.
While I love the Contax gear, I keep it only out of love for the Zeiss signature. The Canon 1v (film) and 1Ds (digital) are so fast in focusing in near dark conditions that the system is now my primary 35mm SLR for weddings. I've found the 35/1.4L to rival the Contax and the 135/2L to be unequalled (for the price of $800 new BTW).
Lynn, you will be sorely missed. You offered a gentle spirit and voice of reason here often. Did you not gain some good insights to make you time here of value?
old_admin_CI
Well-Known Member
FYI
Lynn send me an e-mail. Lynn only turned off the e-mail notifications in his profile. He therefore will not be able to see your comments by e-mail immediately. He will surely read from time to time online some threads. But the work pressure does not allow him to read every e-mail and participate that intense in the forum anymore - at least not for the coming months. So do not worry. In his mind, he is still with this great Contax community
M
mike_nunan
Hi Marc,
I'd seen a few complaints about the dial getting nudged around on the M7, but I'd also seen comments from users like you who had never had a problem with it. When I had the camera in my hands, it did seem that the dial would be easy enough to shift by accident, and it seemed like a silly thing to have to worry about on a Leica. I guess a good way to fix it would be to get one of those holders for the film box flap from konermann.net -- a useful enough thing to have anyway and it protects the dial. It turns out I can't afford an M7 right now anyway, due to an unexpected bill that showed up yesterday, so maybe I'm just looking for a reason not to feel too sorry about it! ;o)
Truthfully though, the camera didn't sell itself to me when I handled it. They've made the edges of the top plate sharper than they are on my M6 (I don't know whether that's because my M6 is so worn-in or if it's just that the new CNC-machined solid brass top plate allows them to make it that way) and the new camera doesn't seem as snug in my hand as my old one. The first time I tried the M6 it gave me a feeling of immense rightness that the M7 somehow doesn't quite deliver. Still, I don't knock the M7 and I expect I'll plump for the next generation AE body (M8 or whatever) when Leica get around to producing one.
I also agree that the EOS-1v/Ds is the the ch& for AF. If the light is really low (ISO1600 territory) then I'd still sooner have the RTS II for people shots though. With the ground glass screen you don't have to recompose to focus accurately on peoples' eyes, and the EOS just becomes fiddly in the same circumstances. With flash and less hair-trigger aperture settings it's a non-issue. I've heard that the 35/1.4L is a winner and if I didn't love the 35/2 as much as I do then I might invest. Instead I went for the 24/1.4L which is a decent enough lens, but with Canon the problem starts when you want to go wider. For a start they should replace the 20/2.8 with an L-grade lens. I see you give the nod to the 14/2.8L, but that's actually a little wider than I would wish to go generally. Also quality is a relative thing and you have to remain realistic about the edge performance of a 14mm rectilinear, retrofocus lens. Judging by Canon's own charts, I don't think this lens would be the right move for me, although it might be a good partner for one of the cheaper part-frame digitals if it wasn't quite so expensive. The 135/2L is a wonderful lens. I got mine s/h for a good price (GBP420) but $800 new is seriously cheap, what a bargain!
Best regards,
-= mike =-
I'd seen a few complaints about the dial getting nudged around on the M7, but I'd also seen comments from users like you who had never had a problem with it. When I had the camera in my hands, it did seem that the dial would be easy enough to shift by accident, and it seemed like a silly thing to have to worry about on a Leica. I guess a good way to fix it would be to get one of those holders for the film box flap from konermann.net -- a useful enough thing to have anyway and it protects the dial. It turns out I can't afford an M7 right now anyway, due to an unexpected bill that showed up yesterday, so maybe I'm just looking for a reason not to feel too sorry about it! ;o)
Truthfully though, the camera didn't sell itself to me when I handled it. They've made the edges of the top plate sharper than they are on my M6 (I don't know whether that's because my M6 is so worn-in or if it's just that the new CNC-machined solid brass top plate allows them to make it that way) and the new camera doesn't seem as snug in my hand as my old one. The first time I tried the M6 it gave me a feeling of immense rightness that the M7 somehow doesn't quite deliver. Still, I don't knock the M7 and I expect I'll plump for the next generation AE body (M8 or whatever) when Leica get around to producing one.
I also agree that the EOS-1v/Ds is the the ch& for AF. If the light is really low (ISO1600 territory) then I'd still sooner have the RTS II for people shots though. With the ground glass screen you don't have to recompose to focus accurately on peoples' eyes, and the EOS just becomes fiddly in the same circumstances. With flash and less hair-trigger aperture settings it's a non-issue. I've heard that the 35/1.4L is a winner and if I didn't love the 35/2 as much as I do then I might invest. Instead I went for the 24/1.4L which is a decent enough lens, but with Canon the problem starts when you want to go wider. For a start they should replace the 20/2.8 with an L-grade lens. I see you give the nod to the 14/2.8L, but that's actually a little wider than I would wish to go generally. Also quality is a relative thing and you have to remain realistic about the edge performance of a 14mm rectilinear, retrofocus lens. Judging by Canon's own charts, I don't think this lens would be the right move for me, although it might be a good partner for one of the cheaper part-frame digitals if it wasn't quite so expensive. The 135/2L is a wonderful lens. I got mine s/h for a good price (GBP420) but $800 new is seriously cheap, what a bargain!
Best regards,
-= mike =-