Brought the Leica M3 in to Panorama Camera Center to see what it was going to cost to fix the problem with the shutter (at slow shutter speeds). The repair guy looked it over and said the camera would need "a complete overhaul," and I believe him. Cost $240. Will be ready in a few weeks. Nice place. Felt comfortable there.
In the meantime, I've gone back to using the Bessa R2A. The main problem I have with that camera is that a) shutter is loud, not as loud as an SLR, but louder than a Leica and b) the viewfinder doesn't automatically switch frame lines when you put a lens in; and in fact, several times, the small lever at the top has moved without my knowing it and I've found myself shooting with the 50mm lens, while the framelines were set to 35mm. That just happened to me again. I'm going to just tape the lever down to 50mm marking since that's the only lens I've been using with the camera.
On the other hand - I'm sure you've got a more accurate and faster shutter in the Bessa, and you also get M7 features like Aperature Priority and even a button on the back to lock exposure while you press said button.
I guess I've come to the conclusion after lots of playing around, and lots of pixel peeping, that this stuff called film is still a better way to go for b&w. Definitely better results than with the p/s digicam. For color - I'd still have to recommend an dSLR with good lenses. In short, what I'm saying is that the lens and image quality of the A640 type of camera is only so - so when you compare it with a good lens. The resolution with the A6xx Canon line just can't be compared with resolution with a good lens and film. Oh well.
In the meantime, I've gone back to using the Bessa R2A. The main problem I have with that camera is that a) shutter is loud, not as loud as an SLR, but louder than a Leica and b) the viewfinder doesn't automatically switch frame lines when you put a lens in; and in fact, several times, the small lever at the top has moved without my knowing it and I've found myself shooting with the 50mm lens, while the framelines were set to 35mm. That just happened to me again. I'm going to just tape the lever down to 50mm marking since that's the only lens I've been using with the camera.
On the other hand - I'm sure you've got a more accurate and faster shutter in the Bessa, and you also get M7 features like Aperature Priority and even a button on the back to lock exposure while you press said button.
I guess I've come to the conclusion after lots of playing around, and lots of pixel peeping, that this stuff called film is still a better way to go for b&w. Definitely better results than with the p/s digicam. For color - I'd still have to recommend an dSLR with good lenses. In short, what I'm saying is that the lens and image quality of the A640 type of camera is only so - so when you compare it with a good lens. The resolution with the A6xx Canon line just can't be compared with resolution with a good lens and film. Oh well.
* * *
8 comments:
Hi Dave,
"...The resolution with the A6xx Canon line just can't be compared with resolution with a good lens and film...."
Speaking strictly about color photos, I can't completely agree with that. Given the right conditions - ability to use ISO 50, no large areas of even tone, a tailwind and the moon in the Seventh House, I get some extraodinary prints up to 12x18 from my A620. I would say as good or better than I ever was able to get with film
Outside those parameters, yes, the quality of the A6xx breed suffers.
"...The repair guy looked it over and said the camera would need "a complete overhaul," and I believe him. Cost $240. ..."
That'll be good for at least 30 years, so your M3 overhaul will cost you no more than $8/year. Not a bad deal!!
By the end of the 30 years, your M3 will be about 80 years old, still beautiful, and going strong.
Steve -
"Given the right conditions..."
Yes. But I did some shooting the other day with the A640 on a tripod, ASA 80, manual mode, manual focus lock, pretty low-key overcast day, using the self-timer so no vibrations - blah blah blah - and I just didn't think the lens quality (ability to resolve small detail) was anywhere near what I would get with a decent SLR or Rangefinder lens. I should post a 100% crop to show. Maybe later... On the other hand - I may be comparing apples and some other fruit when you compare a digital small sensor / p/s lens with an expensive rf lens on film.
But yes - whatever - the moon and all the planets need to be properly aligned to have a chance at it. And I don't think that it is as bad in color when it's been run through some post processing.
"Let's go Leica, Leica let's go!"
Has anyone actually posted full-sized images from the M8 yet?
Leica asks not to publish photos before the firmware is final. Putz had some stuff online for a few days. I was pretty disappointed, especially with noise - but it could be that I'm spoiled by the EOS 5D.
"Haven't seen any M 8 images yet, just some test shots that really don't tell much. I would think that a 10 mp sensor with Leica lenses being used will produce sharp shots."
You would think so - but until someone has gone through tests of the raw files at various ISO settings, different lighting conditions, different lenses etc.
Transmuting light to film through excellent lenses and doing the same thing to a sensor, and then through the internal processing - it just ain't the same animal. Stuff like the number of pixels doesn't even mean much if the noise level is high.
Anyway - I just mentioned it because I am surprised to find people placing $5K orders before seeing raw files.
Leica finalised the firmware last week, so you should start to see samples online soon.
Sean Reid published part two of his M8 review. He mainly compared the M8 with the Canon 5D.
http://www.reidreviews.com/
You'll have to pay the read his reviews (might be worthwhile as it's not expensive and he reviews digicams , dSLRs, dRFs, and film rangefinders to see how well they work for street photography - he's a rangefinder guy).
His findings:
- at low ISOs the M8 keeps up with the 5D in terms of noise. Both the M8 and 5D are 1/3 more sensitive than they claim. On paper the M8 is rated at 160-2500 but is really 200-3200.
- at high ISOs the edge goes to the 5D.
- at low ISOs the M8 draws like medium format and at higher ISOs it draws like 35mm (in terms of detail) or TriX at 1600-3200 if you prefer.
- or, at low ISOs, you can't tell the difference between the M8 and the 5D, but at high ISOs you can and the M8 has similar noise levels to the Nikon D200 at ISO 1600 and 3200 (maybe like your 20D at 1600-3200?).
Post a Comment