Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: M9+M8 challenges

  1. #1
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    M9+M8 challenges

    Getting ahead of the curve on this one . Assuming that the speculation on the M9 is close...FF,18MP,+2EV ...cost near the D3X...special order only for months and depreciated resale values of the M8/M8.2 ......a lot of users will be building kits with both the M8 and the M9.

    This will of course create the opportunity to debate and speculate over the ideal lens kit for your M8s. This is already starting . This is further complicated by the discussion of UV/IR filters.

    It might actually be better for me if they still used the filters. Otherwise a m9/m8 may require changing filters.

    But those are the hardware related issues (always fun but only part of the story). What about the files and associated IQ?

    You hear of numerous situations where people have mixed files from different systems ......wow I can pick out the Leica files make the others look sick? This is extreme when you mix MF with 35mm(see Salgado s book on Africa with m6/R6 and Pentax67 ).....you can see it when you mix say .Cr2 or .NEF files with the Leica DNG s .

    Now you may have 10MP files mixed with 18MP files and using different camera processors. The closest I can come to this is the DMR and the M8 ..they look alike but on some images you can pick out the DMR files . For this reason I try not to use the Nikons with the M8s on the same assignment. But I know others seem to.

  2. #2
    ddk
    Guest

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    The different look from several brand/types of cameras isn't always a bad thing and even desired at times. I often use MF and 35mm cameras for the same shoot so I can have two or three distinctly different sets of images.

  3. #3
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    The context I tend to think in is a collection of 20-24 images for use a web collection ,maybe 100 to work with in a book or a dozen for a print portfolio. Obviously there are no "rules" but this would cover 99% of my usage.

    Different looks makes sense for some situations (sort of like mixing black and white with color ) but would be distracting in my 3 primary uses.

    I try to make my kit seamless and inter changeable as it improves my vision when shooting. Tried working with the DMR and the M8 and its clearly more flexible but yet less effective . The files from the DMR and the M8 have very similar looks and blend easily. Mixing .NEF files with .DNG is a lot tougher. At least in digital you can bring them closer in color rendering....with Kodachrome you were stuck.

    I expect that the M8 and M9 files would render in a similar fashion and its probably not an issue. I don t have a D3x but this would be the best example using a D3x and a D3 or D700 together . Must be pretty common.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Tucson, the other Arizona
    Posts
    136
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Just wait until you have the choice of going from the M12 to the M13, and then we'll find out who has Triskaidekaphobia.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Roger I mix from the 1Ds3, M8 and ZD. As the person editing the files, I see the differences in how the files behave in Photoshop. Their color traits are different, but the end result is pretty similar for web galleries. In print there are some differences because of print size. Probably one of the biggest differences I see is how the cameras roll-off in their highlights. The 1Ds3 is easily the smoothest of my three cameras, but DR challenged. In contrast the ZD holds highlights like super-glue, but doesn't have enough bits to produce silky smooth transitions (when pushed in Photoshop).

    The next difference is mid-tones and detail in the shadows. This can be skewed by exposure compensation and all the aforementioned cameras can handle substantial levels editing to boost mid and lower tones. So, I tend to focus on highlights because I think defects in those areas stand out more - like banding in skies, or funky color banding in bokeh. Assuming the M9 goes 16-bit, I think the M9 will achieve medium format quality (albeit a smaller file size in terms of MP count).

    If the M9 is 18 MP, etc., etc., etc., then I'm selling all my dSLR and MF gear. I'm done carting around 2-3 bags of equipment. To me the M9 will be a P21+ back shrunk down to a very small form factor with some pretty darn good lenses in front of it. If I can't get a picture with that system, so be it. I'm not spending another $10-$20k to build up a second system to fill the gaps.

    Regarding the M8 and IR filters, I guess that's relative. How much money did I lose with the 1Ds' depreciation, then the 1Ds2's depreciation and then the 1Ds3's? Selling a handful of IR filters at a steep discount is pennies in comparison. Fortunately I'm in a good financial position with the M8, so its depreciation will be minimal. Also, I did not do any upgrades to the camera because those upgrades do not have 1:1 value in the used market.

    So my plan is simple - sell, sell, sell. Then simplify. Then shoot the wheels off the M9.

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member KurtKamka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    26

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Quote Originally Posted by John Black View Post
    Roger I mix from the 1Ds3, M8 and ZD. As the person editing the files, I see the differences in how the files behave in Photoshop. Their color traits are different, but the end result is pretty similar for web galleries. In print there are some differences because of print size. Probably one of the biggest differences I see is how the cameras roll-off in their highlights. The 1Ds3 is easily the smoothest of my three cameras, but DR challenged. In contrast the ZD holds highlights like super-glue, but doesn't have enough bits to produce silky smooth transitions (when pushed in Photoshop).

    The next difference is mid-tones and detail in the shadows. This can be skewed by exposure compensation and all the aforementioned cameras can handle substantial levels editing to boost mid and lower tones. So, I tend to focus on highlights because I think defects in those areas stand out more - like banding in skies, or funky color banding in bokeh. Assuming the M9 goes 16-bit, I think the M9 will achieve medium format quality (albeit a smaller file size in terms of MP count).

    If the M9 is 18 MP, etc., etc., etc., then I'm selling all my dSLR and MF gear. I'm done carting around 2-3 bags of equipment. To me the M9 will be a P21+ back shrunk down to a very small form factor with some pretty darn good lenses in front of it. If I can't get a picture with that system, so be it. I'm not spending another $10-$20k to build up a second system to fill the gaps.

    Regarding the M8 and IR filters, I guess that's relative. How much money did I lose with the 1Ds' depreciation, then the 1Ds2's depreciation and then the 1Ds3's? Selling a handful of IR filters at a steep discount is pennies in comparison. Fortunately I'm in a good financial position with the M8, so its depreciation will be minimal. Also, I did not do any upgrades to the camera because those upgrades do not have 1:1 value in the used market.

    So my plan is simple - sell, sell, sell. Then simplify. Then shoot the wheels off the M9.

    John,

    You've eloquently articulated many of the same thoughts that I've been having. In fact, I'm probably further down the path as I'm almost finished selling all of my MF gear. I've been leaning in that direction for awhile, but the M9 rumors have solidified my convictions. I loved my P45+ back, the resolution and the deliberate nature of shooting with it ... but, in the end I feel best when I've got something in my hand that I can shoot with at all times. For some, that all-around camera would be a D3x or a 1DSIII, but for me it seems to be a rangefinder. I love the simplicity and how I think about what I'm shooting when I use one.

    Would a FF M9 be perfect for all of the shooting situations I encounter? No way, but I'm at a peaceful place where I don't really care because I just want to take photos and stop messing with moving in and out of systems and carting around bags full of gear that I really don't need to bring everywhere I go.

    Kurt

  7. #7
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    I don t mind having more than one system...in fact I have always had three systems in some form. A rangefinder system,a SLR and a MF....but one was always favored and accounted for 80% of my work. But I have found that I do better using one at a time. This causes duplication thats really not justified. I like the M rangefinders the best and will use them for everything I can.

    The issue with the filters is not that they will be a total loss..but that I will need them for anything on the M8s. A mixed set will probably be the wide angles on the M9 and the normal/short tele on the M8...otherwise I will have to take off and put on filters. I know for me this will only last until I can get two matched bodies.

  8. #8
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    If I had it my way or let's say my bank account was a little freer the ultimate would be a MF and a M system. I would have everything covered
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    764
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    I will own an m9 despite the price for me most of my personal work, which is why I started shooting is with a m camera. The dillema for me is I will not want jsut one body . will I sell my mate, wate and m6 body so i can afford to and just go with my prime lens kit 24 35 50 and 75 luxes. I thin I might want a 18 a zeiss to keep it affordable. But I also think the 75 will feel short and I will want a 90 again. This stuff never ends. My m8 got sold already and right now I am digital leica less I am in deep withdrawal.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Reunion Island, Indian Ocean
    Posts
    293
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    49

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    I keep my M8 for sure. This will be my second body, although it 's not the same crop factor.
    I am really happy with the comming of this new camera. My personnal kit is now complete and I don't thinkthere will be an evolution for years (hope so ...).
    For the lens I keep the following : 21/2.8 asph , 28 Cron, 35 Cron , 50 cron , canon 50/.095 and 90 apo cron.
    In fact I'll shoot 35 50 90.
    It's true that this M9 could approach or equal the IQ of a Phase One P21, but I'll keep the Alpa kit with the P25+ for landscape, architecture and slow photography !!!
    It's really funny how excited people get with the 09/09/09 coMMing and now it seeMs that the More sceptical one begin to adMit soMething is gonna happen, and it looks like a new Leica M...
    ---------------------------------
    http://stef974.tumblr.com/
    ---------------------------------

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Reunion Island, Indian Ocean
    Posts
    293
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    49

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    So sorry for this MMM obsession ...beg your pardon....
    ---------------------------------
    http://stef974.tumblr.com/
    ---------------------------------

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Well, this bodes well for those who will want to finally get into a M digital but do not have upwards of $8,000. burning a hole in their pocket for a M9.

    Looks like there will be a bunch of M8s up for grabs with supply and demand making them quite affordable. The M8 will not suddenly produce crappier images, so looks to be a great bargain on its way. I suspect the M8.2s and upgraded M8s will not recapture the initial investment as well as M8s, but they'll probably sell faster for the relatively nominal increase in price.

    For me, the mixing systems notion is standard operating procedure. It's never been a problem. Each type of system is used for its relative strength in delivering what is required for the assignment. I have yet to see one that can do it all well, and I refuse to compromise for the sake of my own convenience.

    I have no problem using a Nikon D3X/D3, a Sony A900, and a M8 at a wedding, (MFD use for weddings has fallen off since the addition of the 24 meg FF D3X and Sony A900). The D3X provides the security of dual card capture for key "must have" shots, excellent zoom lenses that focus faster than anything else, the best flash system, and at 14 bit produces a mid-tone spread with B&W conversions that's hard to tell from the M8 B&Ws when using the newer lenses ... The Sony gets me fast Zeiss primes with a 3D effect second to none for color portraits ... the M8 delivers available-light stealth and candid operation up-close and personal. I selectively put all in a Think Tank Airport Airstream roller with the Ms in a tiny shoulder bag sitting on top.

    While I can pick out what photos were shot with what camera, my clients couldn't care less. They are content driven and so am I. How each camera relates to the content at hand determines its use, not whether the whole thing is homogenous in look and feel. A color Bridal portrait need not look like a B&W candid of a groomsman smoking a cigar. Different intent dictates which horse gets to gallop.

    That said, my hope is that the M9 will allow me to more fully use the rangefinder method at weddings and shift my take on the content in that direction more than now ... not exclusively, but "more of" ... so it's worth it. 16 to 18 meg, full frame, a bit higher ISO ability and easier exposure comp will do that in spades. If it doesn't then I won't buy it, and continue using 2 M8s.

    Different strokes for different folks

  13. #13
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Mark

    You have an excellent example of mixing systems. You seem to do this enough that mixing systems must come second nature to you. I shoot a lot (20K) year and can shoot an M with my eyes closed . Throw a D3 into the mix and I have to adjust a little. For someone that shoots a lot less, its even more difficult. You would have to admit that it takes far more skill and effort to work a wedding with three systems than one. I would never advise someone to mix systems unless it was absolutely required for the assignment .

    Most people using combinations are doing so because they don t choose to invest in any one system (for whatever reason). So they only have an M8 and say a Canon 5d and not enough glass for either system. This does provide better flexibility but increases the complexity of using say two methods to focus. The trade off seems to be in having the perfect tool for the job or being ready and capable of using it. Carry this forward into post processing ...and it multiples the cost and the effort. As an example ..the biggest issue for me in MF is the $$$ and effort associated with the technology required to do it right. This could be a good debate(discussion) in itself.

    Each person has a specific personal "context" in mind and this ,of course , colors the discussion. You are absolutely right that for Brides ..the priorities are (1) do "I" look pretty! (2) did you catch the moment (3) does the photo look good or "hip" . You know all this but what is relevant is a bride doesn t really judge much on quality(as most of the forum would define it) .....I believe its more of a personal choice. I am a much worse critic of my work than a bride. ( an aside I had a few portfolio reviews this year and the former editor of Rolling Stone magazine told me Annie Leibowitz has nothing to be worried about).

    So I tried to establish my personal "context" in the beginning. A uniform look to a logical group of images works better for me and its my goal. (we can always argue about why?). An example in 2008 I shot Spring Training in Florida for a month using the M8 , the DMR and the D3 . Sometimes together ..sometimes on different days . Two to three thousand selects (I don t shoot continuous)...the M8 and DMR images can be merged seamlessly (and really stand out ) the D3 s aren t nearly as good. So I am off to fix my profile and settings for the .NEF files and yes you can make them look a lot closer . A waste of time? maybe but when I pull the collections from the selects they look better. Since then I have been trying to focus my systems on a specific use. M8 s for travel and street and the Nikon s for weather and sports . Obsessive ...no kidding?


    The M9 will be so expensive that few will switch entirely to more than one body . If the sensor and processing technology is very different from the M8 ? Then some may be working with two systems in post processing. (will C1 be the best RawConverter for the M9?).

  14. #14
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Quote Originally Posted by steflaurent974 View Post
    I keep my M8 for sure. This will be my second body, although it 's not the same crop factor.
    I am really happy with the comming of this new camera. My personnal kit is now complete and I don't thinkthere will be an evolution for years (hope so ...).
    For the lens I keep the following : 21/2.8 asph , 28 Cron, 35 Cron , 50 cron , canon 50/.095 and 90 apo cron.
    In fact I'll shoot 35 50 90.
    It's true that this M9 could approach or equal the IQ of a Phase One P21, but I'll keep the Alpa kit with the P25+ for landscape, architecture and slow photography !!!
    It's really funny how excited people get with the 09/09/09 coMMing and now it seeMs that the More sceptical one begin to adMit soMething is gonna happen, and it looks like a new Leica M...

    Your P25+ would still be better. Big 9 micron sensor that has a lot of juice behind it
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Mark

    You have an excellent example of mixing systems. You seem to do this enough that mixing systems must come second nature to you. I shoot a lot (20K) year and can shoot an M with my eyes closed . Throw a D3 into the mix and I have to adjust a little. For someone that shoots a lot less, its even more difficult. You would have to admit that it takes far more skill and effort to work a wedding with three systems than one. I would never advise someone to mix systems unless it was absolutely required for the assignment .

    Most people using combinations are doing so because they don t choose to invest in any one system (for whatever reason). So they only have an M8 and say a Canon 5d and not enough glass for either system. This does provide better flexibility but increases the complexity of using say two methods to focus. The trade off seems to be in having the perfect tool for the job or being ready and capable of using it. Carry this forward into post processing ...and it multiples the cost and the effort. As an example ..the biggest issue for me in MF is the $$$ and effort associated with the technology required to do it right. This could be a good debate(discussion) in itself.

    Each person has a specific personal "context" in mind and this ,of course , colors the discussion. You are absolutely right that for Brides ..the priorities are (1) do "I" look pretty! (2) did you catch the moment (3) does the photo look good or "hip" . You know all this but what is relevant is a bride doesn t really judge much on quality(as most of the forum would define it) .....I believe its more of a personal choice. I am a much worse critic of my work than a bride. ( an aside I had a few portfolio reviews this year and the former editor of Rolling Stone magazine told me Annie Leibowitz has nothing to be worried about).

    So I tried to establish my personal "context" in the beginning. A uniform look to a logical group of images works better for me and its my goal. (we can always argue about why?). An example in 2008 I shot Spring Training in Florida for a month using the M8 , the DMR and the D3 . Sometimes together ..sometimes on different days . Two to three thousand selects (I don t shoot continuous)...the M8 and DMR images can be merged seamlessly (and really stand out ) the D3 s aren t nearly as good. So I am off to fix my profile and settings for the .NEF files and yes you can make them look a lot closer . A waste of time? maybe but when I pull the collections from the selects they look better. Since then I have been trying to focus my systems on a specific use. M8 s for travel and street and the Nikon s for weather and sports . Obsessive ...no kidding?


    The M9 will be so expensive that few will switch entirely to more than one body . If the sensor and processing technology is very different from the M8 ? Then some may be working with two systems in post processing. (will C1 be the best RawConverter for the M9?).
    On the contrary, I found that trying to force one system to do all things requires far more skill and practice. Obviously, modern 35mm DSLRs are a bit of an exception to that, but they're so darned big and usually have some optical drawback somewhere in the lens line up. This is why I use a D3X with the new zooms, and the A900 with Zeiss 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 at the same wedding ... the best from each. I have complete systems for each but only on ocassion use one system for an assignment.

    However, my approach has never been technical centric, but more content oriented when selecting tools. So, I tend to see all cameras as being the same ... a box with media in it, and a lens hanging off the front ... which is where the main differences lay IMO. All the rest is camera minutia that garners endless discussion and debate that far outstrips it's actual importance.

    I also tend to use the same types of settings on every camera. Aperture preferred and manual. Probably 65-70% manual. All I need remember is where to turn on the camera and where the AEL button is when shooting A ... which is usually in the same place on most cameras due to human anatomy. All the rest are clearly labeled.

    I change camera systems at will (except the M which is a constant because no real alternative exists). These changes are mostly due to some improvement in IQ or basic features that are of use to me, and/or will allow more focus on content and less on the camera.

    I kept the D3 for one reason only, low light/high ISO especially of moving subjects. Can't capture the content if you can't take the shot. The DMR produces beautiful images but was useless for this ... so it went bye-bye.

    I train my assistants to be the same ... don't get attached to the camera, its a tool that can be replaced by another that's faster, smarter, tougher, or whatever. Master the basic concepts of photography, and every camera will be "your camera". Don't be seduced by every tech button some engineer tosses on a camera to make marketing points.

    Like I said, different strokes for different folks.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    525
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    I look for diversity of images in all respects. I like to shoot with different equipment because I do different images because of it.

    I've decided to hold the horses until november +- (For this M9 that I will surely get at some point) so that I can get my credit card ready after all the summer expenses.

    I am really into the Yedi type of shooting where you have to "trust your instincts" that the M8 has given.

    In the meantime I will try to use wa's in film so that I can figure them out.
    Last edited by gero; 21st August 2009 at 08:47.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Mark - I think an important distinction here is - for work versus for fun. If shooting commercially, then I would use multiple systems as well. If 2, 3, 4, 5 systems works your business, I would never tell you otherwise. You know how you like to work, you know what improves your profitability and what doesn't.

  18. #18
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Mark

    Sorry I went down this path as I was just trying to move the conversation beyond the pure hardware considerations. My primary interest was in achieving a consistent look from what will probably be a mixed system with M8 and M9 bodies .

    However just from a debate standpoint ...your argument for multiple systems doesn t hold water. Your personal preference aside ..there is little logic to mixing a Sony and Nikon on the same assignment. You appreciate the distinction between the two systems and at the same time acknowledge that brides really can t. You further note that you have to train your assistants to use more than one system. Then you go on to state that "force fitting a system is worse" . Hardly what I recommended.

    Since the world now revolves around wedding photography rather than my original post ....IMHO for 99.5% of all wedding photographers ..they should pick either Nikon or Canon . Invest enough in their equipment to cover the requirements and get good at using a single system. If you consider the investment to have a decent workflow and are intent on actually making a living ...this is enough.

    I am sure this is not your situation at all . You work is so good that you can command a premium sufficient to justify maintaining what 4 systems to get the job done. But thats just not relevant to just about anyone on the forum.

    The issue that most have is they want a full range of capabilities and enjoy mastering new gear ..the trade off is that few ever master what they have and rarely get the most out of their equipment.

    Sorry for my rant but I am not swallowing that its easier to mix systems than to focus on one ...and if you pick a DSLR from Nikon or Canon you will be hard pressed to show a need beyond what they provide.

    Have a different opinion is fine but characterizing my POV as "force fitting" implies I am clueless about the trade offs.

    OK I am done .

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Mark

    Sorry I went down this path as I was just trying to move the conversation beyond the pure hardware considerations. My primary interest was in achieving a consistent look from what will probably be a mixed system with M8 and M9 bodies .

    However just from a debate standpoint ...your argument for multiple systems doesn t hold water. Your personal preference aside ..there is little logic to mixing a Sony and Nikon on the same assignment. You appreciate the distinction between the two systems and at the same time acknowledge that brides really can t. You further note that you have to train your assistants to use more than one system. Then you go on to state that "force fitting a system is worse" . Hardly what I recommended.

    Since the world now revolves around wedding photography rather than my original post ....IMHO for 99.5% of all wedding photographers ..they should pick either Nikon or Canon . Invest enough in their equipment to cover the requirements and get good at using a single system. If you consider the investment to have a decent workflow and are intent on actually making a living ...this is enough.

    I am sure this is not your situation at all . You work is so good that you can command a premium sufficient to justify maintaining what 4 systems to get the job done. But thats just not relevant to just about anyone on the forum.

    The issue that most have is they want a full range of capabilities and enjoy mastering new gear ..the trade off is that few ever master what they have and rarely get the most out of their equipment.

    Sorry for my rant but I am not swallowing that its easier to mix systems than to focus on one ...and if you pick a DSLR from Nikon or Canon you will be hard pressed to show a need beyond what they provide.

    Have a different opinion is fine but characterizing my POV as "force fitting" implies I am clueless about the trade offs.

    OK I am done .
    Please don't extrapolate from my response and put words into my mouth I didn't write.

    I do not "train" my assistants to use multiple systems. I don't train them in ANY system. I try to teach them the fundamentals of photography which are easily accomplished with most any main system. I most certainly don't avocate multiple systems to beginners and never said that I did.

    I explained the logic of using different cameras as I see that logic, of course you need not agree ... but I don't agree with your way either, so I guess your way doesn't hold water either, right?

    It is absolutley nothing new that photographers use different types of cameras because of their pimary strengths, agruing against that defies history. I use a view camera also, which makes it even worse I guess.

    Your original post revolved around mixing files ... my reference point is doing that for wedding photography ... sorry for using that example if it offends you so much. But the concept is the same no matter what you are shooting as you made reference to with Salgodo.

    My point about Brides not caring that much was to point out that their primary context is "content" more than anything else ... and certain types of content lend themselves to different camera types. However, my clients DO recognize beauty, or clarity or other image characteristics when they see them ... they just don't know or care how it got there.

  20. #20
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Mark

    I give up. I have tried to follow your logic and can only see that you have a strong POV about the need for multiple systems. I am making no effort to change anything you have said and frankly my point of view is based on my experience. Yours of course may differ . You have taken exception to most of the points I have made which is your right. I concede .

    To clarify the point on Salgado s book. He chose to shoot three systems ,all film , for his book on Africa. The M6,R6 and the Pentax 67. I believe he used tri x for all systems so the look was close . The M6 and R6 images are essentially interchangeable . The 120 files of course look considerably different . One of the criticisms of the book were the differences ....how the 35mm looked when placed next to the 120 images in the book. It hurt the flow . I have had two different PJ tell me this is a consideration when putting together a web collection , a book or an print exhibit. Obviously this is a preference item and others may feel its a silly constraint . What I perceive as "apples and oranges " may be "peaches and cream" to others.

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M9+M8 challenges

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Mark

    I give up. I have tried to follow your logic and can only see that you have a strong POV about the need for multiple systems. I am making no effort to change anything you have said and frankly my point of view is based on my experience. Yours of course may differ . You have taken exception to most of the points I have made which is your right. I concede .

    To clarify the point on Salgado s book. He chose to shoot three systems ,all film , for his book on Africa. The M6,R6 and the Pentax 67. I believe he used tri x for all systems so the look was close . The M6 and R6 images are essentially interchangeable . The 120 files of course look considerably different . One of the criticisms of the book were the differences ....how the 35mm looked when placed next to the 120 images in the book. It hurt the flow . I have had two different PJ tell me this is a consideration when putting together a web collection , a book or an print exhibit. Obviously this is a preference item and others may feel its a silly constraint . What I perceive as "apples and oranges " may be "peaches and cream" to others.
    That's the point. It differs person to person.

    BTW, I don't confuse need with want. I don't need anything except a D3 and a couple of zooms to do 90% of my work.

    However, I want more.

    Just like people adapt Leica lenses to Canon cameras ... or any number of custom things people do to get what they want.

    Why should I limit myself to a "system" that comes up short in certain areas? Just get the another one that excells at that specific thing.

    I'd immediately settle down to a single system when and if one can do everything I want to do.

    It's a fairly common lament that Nikon is weak in fast primes, Canon isn't ... but is weak in wide zooms. Sony has some fast primes and excellent zooms but lacks in other areas. So, should I limit what I want to do because the one system can't support it?

    I've never had a problem with choosing glass first and the system second.

    It's Peaches and Cream to me.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •