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!

DMR Image Thread

Thanks David,
Just don't let it get rusty or gather too much dust. Forums like these can often bring about a costly inertia to find the best possible image maker. It's easy to get swept up in this inertia and overlook what you might have in your hands. Before you know it... the DMR is sold or on the top shelf in the closet and you're shooting with something that can't give you what the DMR can, with a little discipline.

It's very hard to beat when long glass is needed for distant or small subjects. It's not the fastest camera to work with... but several years ago I shot the Superbike races at Infineon and I was the only shooter in the press paddock who had manual focus. The other seasoned press photogs had 1D2N's and 1D3's and looked at me like I was some kind of nut case. I was the brunt of their jokes until the end of the first practice session. I shot with the 400 and a tripod and they were shooting with their 100-400's. After the first session, we all returned to the press bldg and everyone downloaded their images onto their laptops. All I heard were moans. Everyone complained that the early morning light was too flat and their auto focus was more out-of-focus. They all fiddles with their cameras as if trying to figure out how to set up the thing. They had all been shooting at 8 fps so there was a lot of junk to be deleted.

I walked over to a group of photogs with my MacBook Pro and asked if they thought what was on my screen was "acceptable"? The question was somewhat innocent as this was the first motorcycle race I'd shot in over 25 years.

The reaction was pretty amazing. First they looked at the laptop, front and back. Then they looked at the DMR and lens sitting by my backpack. Their expressions were quizzical and totally mystified... as if I was either cheating or there was something akin to alchemy being performed (there was). I had been shooting Ben Spies as he leaned into turns, puck in contact with the pavement, and you could read every word on his helmet and bike clearly. They then looked at their cameras and lenses and for a second I thought they were going to dump their gear in the many trash cans throughout the room. I had one frame per second, or less, but my frames were keepers and theirs were deleted.

Learn to use what you have. It might surprise you.

L
 

paulmoore

New member
it is a cold dark wet june day here as well.. here is one from last summer on a toasty day at the local beach.
I think this was with the 35lux
edit..why is it that this looks a bit too yellow but when I click on the image it comes up with a black surround and color is better?
I "saved for web" as srgb..
 
Last edited:

jaapv

Subscriber Member
Because your eye has its own built-in colour balance compensator. Or rather the seeing-centre of your brain. The black surround provides the reference.
 

doug

Well-known member
A few from yesterday in the Sierra Nevada:

Cliff Swallow:


Mountain Bluebird:




The bluebird pair was photographed with a lens that cost me all of US$50. It's an old 560mm f/6.8 that was given to me in poor condition. I stripped the camo tape & gummy residue off, had DAG repair & re-lube the focus, not much either of us can do about the dings & scratches in the glass. Looks like it's a keeper.
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Doug - once again, nice images and what a bargain! The Leica R glass and the DMR sensor is really a great combo. Can't wait to see that 560mm bolted onto the front of some Pansonic?!!? body. hahaha
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
A few from a short stroll on the weekend with the DMR. First two with the 180/2.8, last one with the 80mm.










 
Depressing to be stuck with such old, outdated technology...

First a big "congratulations and how did you do that?" to Doug for the brilliant Cliff Swallow shot! That was not a zone focused shot and it was not apo glass yet Doug continues to amaze with his Telyt mastery!

Next, after reading an earlier thread expounding on what a mistake it would be to get a DMR instead of a 5D2 with intent to use Leica glass... and reading the many reasons why the DMR is such an "outdated, lower resolution, non weather sealed, cropped sensor, one card slotted, big and heavy (though lighter than the 1Ds3), slow slow slow, (have I left anything out?) camera..." I'm beside myself that I'm stuck with this piece of kak! Can't decide whether to throw it in the ocean or the trash can as I surely wouldn't think of saddling any second-hand buyer with such garbage! The horror... the horror!

But before I dump it, I thought I'd dig out a few of the shots I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread: A Day at the Races. I hadn't shot racing since the early 70's and my tired eyes can't compare with what I used to be able to accomplish w/respect to focusing back then. In the early 70's I was shooting a non motor driven Nikon F2A with an 80-200 f4.5 lens, so I wasn't able to get as tight as I now can with my 280 and 400 APO lenses with the horrible cropped sensor on the DMR.

I guess I just got lucky on that May day in 2007 when the race came to Infineon. I had a press pass and was down on the track with all the heavy hitters who shoot for the magazines etc etc. Heard lots of grunts and groans about what they were getting with their 1D2's and 1D3's with state of the art Canon glass. Bummer that I had to shoot with crappy manual focus APO glass that Leica stopped selling after 1996. Before I shoot myself and discard my DMR, I thought I'd post a few shots from that day just to keep the thread alive.

Thanks to all who keep the faith in such a miserable, inadequate camera. We're all fellow DMR suffururs so we need to console each other for our masochistic tendencies in continuing to shoot with such a piece of junk.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Since you are quoting my statements, I feel like I should at least respond. Your photos are wonderful, and I am glad the DMR is working for you. I shot with the DMR for three years, and I found it to be an excellent camera. I think I said as much in my words, though you are not quoting any of the praise I had for it. But I still don't think it is nearly as capable or as well rounded as its modern equivalents from Nikon and Canon for the vast majority of shooters. The strength of the DMR is in the glass, the 16 bit color, and in the lack of the AA filter. Those things can help create some exceptional photos, but my contention is that the disadvantages greatly outweigh the advantages for people looking at a DMR now. If the buyer was a long time R shooter and had the 280 and 400mm APO lenses already, my advice might have been different. But I think your photos here are more a testament to your skill than the appropriateness of the DMR to the type of photos you're are showing.

Anyway, its just my opinion, and I did not mean it as an insult to people still working with the DMR. The poster asked about what people who shot the DMR thought, and I gave my honest experience.

In any case, in the spirit of the thread, here are some of my old DMR photos that I liked.







 
Sorry Stuart!
Apologies for the caustic tongue in cheek response. It's just that some of us have no need for a camera that shoots fast, has autofocus that "can" exhibit a host of problems, and has two card slots. Sure the batteries are heavy and don't last long and the viewing screen is tiny by comparison to current (and even many old) offerings but how in the devil did we ever manage before digital if all of those things are so indispensable?

I have five batteries for my DMR. Sure it's extra gear to carry... but the last thing i want is to run out of memory cards and battery power when the hummingbirds are performing for me. Everything I shoot is tripod mounted as I shoot my DMR as if it were a 4x5, so the weight is not an issue. That's just me. I've always tried to optimize the quality of any camera I shoot with. Call it anal... but the weak link in my system will always be me. I can't blame it on the camera.

I have no use for a full frame sensor. I'd be happy as a pig in truffles if Leica's next offering also had a cropped sensor as it only gets me closer to my birds and the cloud breaks on the outer reefs I shoot in Hawaii. I don't shoot architecture, apart for images that a 30-70mm lens will work just fine on.

Not everyone needs a 15mm lens (or wider), though one could get the impression from reading any number of different forums that any camera that doesn't have anything wider than a 21mm lens is not worth squat! I'm not quoting you here... just mentioning comments I often see regarding the unavailability of excellent wide angle lenses for Canon and other cameras. I've had the 21 Super Angulon in my bag since 1986 and can count the times I've used it on one hand. It's a wonderful lens when stopped down a bit, but I just prefer the perspective of my 2nd generation 28 Elmarit.

Given my needs with respect to bird photography I seriously doubt that the Sony or Nikon would improve upon what I'm getting at the sizes I'm able to print my hummingbirds. A print of a 20" hummingbird would appear somewhat obscene, to me at least, and there's nothing I could do with a D3X or A900 that I can't do with my DMR with respect to hummingbirds (apart from needing longer lenses due to the full frame sensor). The lenses, as you correctly pointed out in your post, are the be all and end all for what I do. Put one on the Sony or D3X and try doing stop down metering with flying lightening bolts and see how far you get.

Would I like more pixels? As long as the sensor is 16 bit and as good on a per pixel level as the DMR the answer is a resounding YES! Focus confirmation for other subject matter would be nice, though I can get by without it. The DMR was a stop-gap measure that still holds it's own against anything currently made provided you don't need fast focus tracking for sports or birds. And since Kaufmann recently announced that Leica was finally getting control of the DMR's software brains from Hasselblad (Imacon) I think it might be a bit premature to say there will never be another firmware release. I personally think that is more likely than a new 35mm camera from Leica that allows use of the R optics. In any case... the only thing I wish for is cleaner files (read: less noise) at 400 asa and above with my DMR as well as a larger buffer.

I also like the ability to shoot film with my R8's. Show me any other 35mm camera that can do that.
Respectfully,
Lawrence
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I'd have to agree with Stuart on this ... I used the DMR/9 for many years also ... loved the look without any reservations ... but its lack of versatility made it a less than a practical choice for too many situations that I faced ... and that is a lot of money to be tied up in a limited use system.

I think it is a speciality camera, and for those who's speciality it fits it is a wonderful set up with the best lenses ever made for 35mm SLR type cameras. In skilled hands it sings a siren's song. Conditions or applications it is not suited for is a different matter altogether.

Anyone considering the DMR must take honest stock of their applications ... all of them. Being seduced by super skilled shooters that work with-in the boundaries of the DMR can lead to disappointment if their needs are different.

Not for or against anything, just advocating assessment of real applications and skill level when selecting any gear.
 

doug

Well-known member
Not for or against anything, just advocating assessment of real applications and skill level when selecting any gear.
This excellent advice is often forgotten in making equipment choices or recommendations. One disadvantage the DMR has when making equipment comparisons is that it's image quality is much harder to quantify than the frame rates, number of metering modes and pixels where other brands and models have an advantage. How do we measure the haunting beauty, color and sensuousness of an image file made with the DMR and APO lenses? Left brain or right brain?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
This excellent advice is often forgotten in making equipment choices or recommendations. One disadvantage the DMR has when making equipment comparisons is that it's image quality is much harder to quantify than the frame rates, number of metering modes and pixels where other brands and models have an advantage. How do we measure the haunting beauty, color and sensuousness of an image file made with the DMR and APO lenses? Left brain or right brain?
Doug, this is almost the same discussion going on concerning the Sony A900 which has a unique look to the files, but is not for all applications.

I loved the DMR but could not use it for weddings due to the flash system, lack of low light ability, and slower ability to focus with these aging eyes. But when it sang it was a beautiful voice like no other even to this day.
 
The strength of the DMR is in the glass, the 16 bit color, and in the lack of the AA filter. Those things can help create some exceptional photos,
Isn't that the truth! When I bought the DMR it was absolutely the right camera for me. My clients and my personal work both demanded MF quality, but didn't really need MF megapixels. Both the weight and cost of MF digital made it impractical for me. IMO you still don't get better prints than the DMR until you get into MFDBs. Other cameras are far better for pixel peeping, but in the end the print is what matters.

However, as much as the DMR borders on a religion for some, it is a tool for me, and my needs have changed in a way that makes me think the DMR is no longer the best tool for me, which is why I'm selling mine and looking very hard at a Sony. It is possible that in the end a M8 may win out if I decide that weight is more important than ultimate flexibility.

Few recent shots:









 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, I have my generic settings pretty well dialed in through Flex Color. For the images in the previous post, settings were applied on ingest to Flex Color, saved as tiffs, then resized via photoshop action through Bridge.
 
Top