The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
About to dip my toe into Leica M system...guidance needed!
- Thread starter jubbaa
- Start date
Shashin
Well-known member
If you simply look at his work you can see he did experiment with focal length and cropping--did your friend know him for his entire career? He certainly was not the type of photographer to work in groups. He dropped cropping early on and certainly became more conservative with his style later in his career. He was a very good photographer and like all successful photographers was good at composition.
Shashin
Well-known member
Using a Leica with a 50mm lens will not make you into an HBC, nor should you want to be. If you start reading the biographies of successful photographers, you will soon see they succeeded with very different styles and approaches--no two are alike. What you really need to discover is what makes you successful.
StephenPatterson
New member
I absolutely agree, and I have a cabinet full of Leica glass to prove it!
My point is that only buying one at a time and using only one for a matter of weeks or months allows the new Leica owner to focus on composition and learn the specific signature of that lens without distraction. It will make the choice of the second lens very easy, as he should know by review if he has been constantly walking forward or backward!
Shashin
Well-known member
I definitely believe in slamming the doors and kicking the tires if you get a new car or camera. You want to know how it handles. But having a wide and normal at the same time can also be valuable as it gives a comparative frame. If you are fairly new to photography it is really difficult to understand what the significance of one focal length means from simply the experience of a different focal length--I don't think you can really conceptualize it.I absolutely agree, and I have a cabinet full of Leica glass to prove it!
But like I said, the one lens deal works for some. There just seemed to be a growing consensus to the one-lens approach and I just wanted to say it might not be the best approach for everybody.
edwardkaraa
New member
I have his book on India, and believe it or not, many inages are OOF
Godfrey
Well-known member
Sometimes I like to work within the constraints of having just one lens, it's an aesthetic constraint to spawn creativity. But at this point in my life, I have way more lenses than I need.
I could only afford one lens (a 50mm normal) for the first year I owned my first Nikon F, way back in age of dinosaurs when the F was a new camera. I read enough books on photography that I knew exactly what I wanted next, and bought it when I had the money a year later. (That was a 200mm Soligor lens ...) It was only later that I managed to convince an uncle that I deserved to borrow his Nikkor 21 and 85 mm lenses. I had the use of them for the next three or four years, on and off.
All I was agreeing with is that, for a newcomer, it's better buy one bloody expensive Leica lens at a time and take the time to get thoroughly familiar with it, rather than buying a bunch of lenses and never coming to grips with them.
G
Guys,
Wow, thanks for taking the time to respond. I have been following the thread since starting it but I apologise for going 'dark' and not responding sooner , I just haven't had the time. But what a lovely surprise to see that it had jumped from 9 replies to 27 over night!
A wealth of advice which has changed my approach. It seems that there is a definite sense that 35 and 50 could be too close for an initial pairing . This is something that had kind of been bugging me in the back of my mind, but thanks to the posts kicked off by Paratom suggesting 28 and 50 as a better pairing it managed to crystallize it as a question I should ask myself before I jump ...so thank you Paratom for kick starting a whole new round of GAS for me , lol.
@Mikel, thanks for making me think about whether it is the right tool for me. I get a sense that when it comes to leica it is hard to rational ,haha. Clearly top end FF digital SLR's are more 'capable' ( meaning flexible ) cameras than an M9 , and with them comes auto focus , however I know one thing for certain - I just don't like SLR's, I never have, and in trying to be rational I went to camera shop recently to check out a couple- they were so big, heavy, ugly (IMO) and soo many controls and buttons that it just turned me right off. I then popped a long to the leica dealer , put an M9 in my hands and fell in love...rational eh? I also have no need for zooms as 3 years ago I fitted a 20mm prime to my GF1 and have never looked back. Manual focus is something I will have to get used to but I am sure I will soon be able to match the speed of my x100 in no time , haha.
And then there is the 'Leica look' in the photos that I can't get anywhere else.
Following on from Mikel's point a number of you have suggested to get one lens only . I think this is a great idea and makes perfect sense to me. Without committing too much capital I will be able to truly tell if rangefinder photography is for me , and at the same time get to know the lens better.
@Animefx : thanks for sharing your photos, they are great. I particularly liked the basketball player , I loved the composition and light.
To those who suggested a lens beyond 50mm say the 75 or 90, I don't particularly like the telephoto or zoomed look and prefer my images to be more intimate ...but hey, never say never.
This last point actually addresses a couple of areas that I have started to think about since starting this thread. The first is that focal length is a personal choice and I wont really truly know what I want and like, and what works for my style of photography, until I shoot with them. The second is that I will probably , in the end , own more than one or two lenses
@ Stephen I haven't travelled to Chongquing yet but if I do I will drop you a line, please pm me if you are coming to Shanghai as I would like to buy you a beer or two and pick your brain.
@ Sebastian - lets meet , I will pm you.
@ all , thank you once again for taking the time to think about my dilemma and help me with the decision making process. I will keep you posted on my progress, and look forward to participating more in the future.
James.
Wow, thanks for taking the time to respond. I have been following the thread since starting it but I apologise for going 'dark' and not responding sooner , I just haven't had the time. But what a lovely surprise to see that it had jumped from 9 replies to 27 over night!
A wealth of advice which has changed my approach. It seems that there is a definite sense that 35 and 50 could be too close for an initial pairing . This is something that had kind of been bugging me in the back of my mind, but thanks to the posts kicked off by Paratom suggesting 28 and 50 as a better pairing it managed to crystallize it as a question I should ask myself before I jump ...so thank you Paratom for kick starting a whole new round of GAS for me , lol.
@Mikel, thanks for making me think about whether it is the right tool for me. I get a sense that when it comes to leica it is hard to rational ,haha. Clearly top end FF digital SLR's are more 'capable' ( meaning flexible ) cameras than an M9 , and with them comes auto focus , however I know one thing for certain - I just don't like SLR's, I never have, and in trying to be rational I went to camera shop recently to check out a couple- they were so big, heavy, ugly (IMO) and soo many controls and buttons that it just turned me right off. I then popped a long to the leica dealer , put an M9 in my hands and fell in love...rational eh? I also have no need for zooms as 3 years ago I fitted a 20mm prime to my GF1 and have never looked back
. Manual focus is something I will have to get used to but I am sure I will soon be able to match the speed of my x100 in no time , haha.And then there is the 'Leica look' in the photos that I can't get anywhere else.
Following on from Mikel's point a number of you have suggested to get one lens only . I think this is a great idea and makes perfect sense to me. Without committing too much capital I will be able to truly tell if rangefinder photography is for me , and at the same time get to know the lens better.
@Animefx : thanks for sharing your photos, they are great. I particularly liked the basketball player , I loved the composition and light.
To those who suggested a lens beyond 50mm say the 75 or 90, I don't particularly like the telephoto or zoomed look and prefer my images to be more intimate ...but hey, never say never.
This last point actually addresses a couple of areas that I have started to think about since starting this thread. The first is that focal length is a personal choice and I wont really truly know what I want and like, and what works for my style of photography, until I shoot with them. The second is that I will probably , in the end , own more than one or two lenses
@ Stephen I haven't travelled to Chongquing yet but if I do I will drop you a line, please pm me if you are coming to Shanghai as I would like to buy you a beer or two and pick your brain.
@ Sebastian - lets meet , I will pm you.
@ all , thank you once again for taking the time to think about my dilemma and help me with the decision making process. I will keep you posted on my progress, and look forward to participating more in the future.
James.
James- If you ever read M. Thein, who does marvelous reviews, he thinks the 20mm lens for the GF1 is right up at the top of his all time favorite list. I agree and so does my wife who has decided to forego her M9 I bought for her and go back to the GF1 +20 and the 45 macro.
There is no shame in going backwards if it brings you forword.
There is no shame in going backwards if it brings you forword.
So much great advice is offered in this thread and if there is simultaniously both a consencious of what lens(s) to begin with vs. a divergence of opinions, it just goes to show that there is no right or wrong, just persional preference with regards to shooting styles and personal vision.
I'll add my two cents. When I started out many years ago with formal training (both on a rangefinder and simple 35mm SLR), it was strongly suggested that only a single 50mm be used, in order to concentrate on the "art" of picture taking, especially learning both composition and recognizing what makes a successful image as opposed to being focused (no pun intended) on the equipment. The persuit of such goals were such that after a time, I forgot about the idea of switching lenses etc., and loved the idea of going out and finding images that were not mearly photographs, but were able to convey my vision of what is often refered to as the decisve moment. Of course I've long gotten away from this (unfortunately) and am as much as anyone interested in various focal length lenses for all the reasons expressed here in this thread.
Bottom line, it's hard to know what focal length or lengths to suggest unless someone knows intimately the type of photography you initially plan to do with your camera and I believe equally important what your own personal goals are in terms of your images.
In one sense you can start out with one lens like a 50mm (or 35mm) and think only about images, not equipment. After a time you will know which direction (focal length wise) your next purchase might be. Purchasing less expensive lenses like the Voightlanders, older vintage Leica's etc., gives you a little more flexability to not worry so much if you spent a fortune and brought the wrong focal length lens and ultimately after considerable use and shooting, you'll automatically know which direction to head, both in quality/look in lenses and also additonal lenses besides your initial 35 and/or 50mm lens.
Sometimes starting out in simpler fashion may not seem to be as exciting as selecting a whole bunch of lenses, but the satisfaction of never loosing sight of why you picked up a rangefinder in the first place, ends up being a more valuable lesson than almost anything else with regards to photography. Again just my own personal thoughts. Have fun and enjoy!
Dave (D&A)
I'll add my two cents. When I started out many years ago with formal training (both on a rangefinder and simple 35mm SLR), it was strongly suggested that only a single 50mm be used, in order to concentrate on the "art" of picture taking, especially learning both composition and recognizing what makes a successful image as opposed to being focused (no pun intended) on the equipment. The persuit of such goals were such that after a time, I forgot about the idea of switching lenses etc., and loved the idea of going out and finding images that were not mearly photographs, but were able to convey my vision of what is often refered to as the decisve moment. Of course I've long gotten away from this (unfortunately) and am as much as anyone interested in various focal length lenses for all the reasons expressed here in this thread.
Bottom line, it's hard to know what focal length or lengths to suggest unless someone knows intimately the type of photography you initially plan to do with your camera and I believe equally important what your own personal goals are in terms of your images.
In one sense you can start out with one lens like a 50mm (or 35mm) and think only about images, not equipment. After a time you will know which direction (focal length wise) your next purchase might be. Purchasing less expensive lenses like the Voightlanders, older vintage Leica's etc., gives you a little more flexability to not worry so much if you spent a fortune and brought the wrong focal length lens and ultimately after considerable use and shooting, you'll automatically know which direction to head, both in quality/look in lenses and also additonal lenses besides your initial 35 and/or 50mm lens.
Sometimes starting out in simpler fashion may not seem to be as exciting as selecting a whole bunch of lenses, but the satisfaction of never loosing sight of why you picked up a rangefinder in the first place, ends up being a more valuable lesson than almost anything else with regards to photography. Again just my own personal thoughts. Have fun and enjoy!
Dave (D&A)
As suggested by others, I think it's misleading to repeat facts like "HCB used a normal" or "Sieff used a wide" as support for gear decisions. Doubtful the choice of a focal length determined their compositional excellence. More simply and likely, their compositional sense determined what length they used.
Might be better just to shoot a lot with what first grabs your fancy, study your work, find your compositional strength, and then what you need/buy will take care of itself. Same goes for lens rendering qualities too.
Might be better just to shoot a lot with what first grabs your fancy, study your work, find your compositional strength, and then what you need/buy will take care of itself. Same goes for lens rendering qualities too.