Making the transition - a Leica M8 user meets the GRD2

[chris_tribble]

Some good news and some (sort of) bad. Picked up a GRD2 yesterday from the nice people at RG Lewis + the 21-28 finder (for a ridiculously cheap £40 - go and get one while they're still in stock!).

THE CAMERA
In my hands the GR is TINY - makes it difficult to feel confident holding it + the wrist strap's on the wrong side for me, so not particularly useful... Second, it was easy to set up and is proving to be easy to use (the focus light being within periferal vision when you're using the finder is very helpful).

IMAGES

NOISE
I was working at 400 and 800 and have no problems with noise given the sensor size. Compared with the M8 or the 5D or 1D2 which I normally work with, it's noisy, but it's not aesthetically problematic, and the images are more than useable. I have no experience with the GRD1 so can't join in the discussion about better / worse, but from someone whose last small sensor camera was an Ixus vintage 2004, this is a completely different ball game.

DOF
I attach a couple which are beginning to give me an idea of what I'll be able to do with the tool. First, the restaurant shot brings home forcibly the limitation (or some would say strength) of small sensor cameras. The lens was fully open, but the DOF is so great that things on the other side of the room are still highly (and for me) distractingly visible. F2.4 on any of the Leica lenses would be giving OOF 5 or 10 cms on either side of the in-focus and a much better image (from my point of view). Clearly this is something to get used to!

DR
I was aware that the dynamic range of the small sensor would be restricted, but was a bit surprised by the effect of bright light within the frame... rather than giving a stepless gradation from blown to not blown, there's a strange concentric ring effect that's very digital ... Again, something to get used to and to learn to overcome by spot metering and working more carefully.

OVERALL
The good news is that the GRD2 is going to be fun to learn how to use, is incredibly portable, and with the finder, feels spontaneous and easy to use... Lots of things to play with, but the basic sense of it being a photographic tool that's going to usefully complement my other systems.

Thanks to all on the list who introduced me to the GRD2.

Best

Chris

 

[chris_tribble]

And a second thought - I've just realised that the GRD2 could also provide me with an incredibly useful spotmeter to go alongside the M8!! I've been lamenting getting rid of my Minolta Spotmeter - especially in artificially lit performance spaces, but I reckon that by putting the GRD2 into A mode, and selecting an aperture and ISO that matches that which I'm using on the M, I'll be able to evaluate spots on the scene that I'm photographing and reduce blown highlights... I can even use EV compensation to accommodate the extra stops that I have on the M lenses...

Anyone with experience of this?

Best

 

[Robert Campbell]

The GRD is tiny compared to an M8, but huge compared to a Minox sub-min - which has a film size about twice that of the GRD - though you can't really enlarge Minox pix much beyond postcard size.

The wrist strap can be attached to either side of the GRD - what's the problem?

Bertie

 

[Mitch Alland]

...DOF
I attach a couple which are beginning to give me an idea of what I'll be able to do with the tool. First, the restaurant shot brings home forcibly the limitation (or some would say strength) of small sensor cameras. The lens was fully open, but the DOF is so great that things on the other side of the room are still highly (and for me) distractingly visible. F2.4 on any of the Leica lenses would be giving OOF 5 or 10 cms on either side of the in-focus and a much better image (from my point of view). Clearly this is something to get used to!

Chris:

Yes, when framing you gave to look all the way into the frame because so much is in focus.

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

 

[chris_tribble]

The GRD is tiny compared to an M8, but huge compared to a Minox sub-min - which has a film size about twice that of the GRD - though you can't really enlarge Minox pix much beyond postcard size.

The wrist strap can be attached to either side of the GRD - what's the problem?

Bertie

Woops - Bertie - I'd missed that! Problem solved...
Thanks

 

[Sean_Reid]

First, the restaurant shot brings home forcibly the limitation (or some would say strength) of small sensor cameras. The lens was fully open, but the DOF is so great that things on the other side of the room are still highly (and for me) distractingly visible. F2.4 on any of the Leica lenses would be giving OOF 5 or 10 cms on either side of the in-focus and a much better image (from my point of view). Clearly this is something to get used to!

Hi Chris,

I've been thinking about this part of your post this morning, on and off, while I've been photographing. You've just stumbled onto a very interesting opportunity. I know you read the site so, if you're so inclined, read that article called "On Small Sensor Cameras". The timing is right I think.

Back in 2004, when I was reviewing the Digilux 2 for LuLa, I started to realize that these cameras had, however accidentally, created a new format. I came up with the name "small sensor camera" to try to get people thinking about the nature of these cameras rather than seeing them in the ways that have been created by marketing (with artifical categories like consumer, prosumer, point n' shoot and all that other nonsense which has nothing to do with pictures).

One of the central aspects of this photographic format is its very deep DOF. For all of the time that you have been using rangefinder cameras, you've been seeing your subject through this very generous, democratic, viewfinder. That is to say you've had framelines in a bright window in which everything is seen clearly. What the small sensor camera does, in part, is to complete the promise made by the window viewfinder. And the best work that I've seen done with these cameras embraces that DOF and makes excellent use of it.

Photographers are often fed a lot of bull so that various magazines and books can be sold to them, etc. Very often, ideas that are either over-simplified or just plain wrong get peddled as "tips". One of the most hackneyed of these ideas is that short DOF = creativity. In fact, though, its often just a crutch and many of the pictures I see made with shallow DOF seem more derivative than creative. And the sources of their derivations are themselves, often, to my eyes at least, not all that interesting.

One of the myths I talked about in the "Correct Exposure and Other Myths" article is the one that tells us short DOF will "remove confusing elements" etc. That's nonsense. In focus or out, every element in the frame is subject and all of it must be resolved. The elements not at the point of peak focus are nontheless going to become visual forms in the pictures, be their edges hard or soft. They obviously don't disappear.

So...I think you have a great chance to see what you can do with this format. It will mean visually organizing your pictures from side to side and from front to back; everything will need attention. But then, it always does. These cameras force a kind of rigorousness that I think can really be useful to any photographer's growth.

Strong work can be made using deep or shallow DOF but since your new camera naturally wants to draw with the former, why not go with it and see where it takes you?

Best,

Sean

 

[Mitch Alland]

Sean:

What you say about the formulaic use of short DOF is very true, as in portraits, for example. If you look at most of Cartier-Bresson's portraits, or those by Arnold Newman, you see that very few of them use heavily blurred out backgrounds.

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

 

[Caer]

The wrist strap can be attached to either side of the GRD - what's the problem?

Top or bottom, too. That's one of the first things I noticed about the GRD2; I love attention to detail like that

 

[4season]

I've been carrying around a pair of polar opposites lately: The M8 with a Noctilux and it's razor-thin DOF, and the Ricoh GX100 with almost infinite DOF.

The two cameras really let me play around with the viewer's sense of scale: With the Noctilux, I can sometimes make full-sized objects look like tiny ones shot on a macro level!

Meanwhile, the Ricoh lets me move in very close to very small objects, yet I still get a lot of DOF, and among other things, that lets me turn small stalks of grass into tree trunks.

When it first arrived a few weeks ago, I was ready to flip my 30% discounted Nocti on eBay in order to pay for a new 28mm Elmarit because the Nocti is heavy, doesn't focus too close, and I thought I'd get bored of the blurred backgrounds. But it became a lot more interesting to me as both a "negative space" lens and a means to play with that sense of scale.

 

[veriwide]

Speaking of DOF, when I owned a M4 with a 21mm S.A. lens that was the one thing I really wanted from it... DOF.. I tried to always shoot at f8 or less just to keep everything in focus... same with my Brooks Veriwide.. so, I guess the GR 21mm combo is made for me then !!

 

[Terry]

Interesting thread for me. I jumped from only small sensor cameras to the M8. DOF is probably why I love playing around with the TZ3 as you can get a shallow DOF when you need/want it by using the long end of the zoom and shooting in macro mode. Then at 28mm (a little wider in 16:9) you've got everything in focus. If Panny merged the controls /RAW of the LX2 with the TZ3, it could be a really cool camera.

 

[Mitchell]

For me, its easiest to make pictures with a longer lens, something like 100mm. Not only small dof, but also selecting a small part of the field.

The GRD II I've ordered is going to be a challenge, and I hope foster the kind of growth Sean mentions. I wanted the big dof for certain subjects, but its going to be interesting to try to compose some sort of order on all these infocus wide angle parts!

Best,

Mitchell

 

[Sean_Reid]

I wanted the big dof for certain subjects, but its going to be interesting to try to compose some sort of order on all these infocus wide angle parts!

Best,

Mitchell

Hi Mitchell (is this Mitchell of Maine?),

One of the things that you may find is that, as you learn how to build pictures where nearly everything is sharp, this process can focus your attention even better on the parts of the frame that will be blurred (when you use a camera/lens with short DOF). I've talked about this before but its interesting to consider one difference between an SLR and a camera with a window finder. The former normally shows the subject using a very shallow depth of field (because of the max aperture of the lens, say a 50/1.8). So if we shoot wide open with an SLR what we see on the ground glass correlates somewhat to what the camera will record. But if we're working at F/8 with an SLR, we have to imagine, as being in focus, those parts of the frame that are shown to us out of focus. (True, we can preview the DOF but it makes the finder dark and can be awkward when one is working quickly).

An optical finder on the GR2 shows us the subject entirely in focus at all distances. And that is often close to what the lens will record. So, there are also some natural correlations between small sensor DOF and optical window finders.

One difference you may find is that you become increasingly aware of space with the picture frame and that you build the pictures only across a depth that you can visually resolve. Its an interesting and potentially powerful process to practice this (see that discussion of Breughel in the "Street Photography" essay).

I don't know if you have any interest in Winogrand but, like Breughel, he really knew how to build his picture clearly from front to back.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[chris_tribble]

Sean, Mitch, others, thanks for the thoughtful comments. There's a double lesson here for me... First, the more you use a tool, the more you get get from it... Stupidly obvious, but still true. Another day with the GR2 and I'm seeing more how to use it (I'm shooting lower, not using the optical finder for the moment, and thinking about the whole frame rather than the area I want to fix...).

The first picture (a friend met in the street on the way back from her gallery) begins to give me a sense of what the GR2 is going to give me for one aspect of my work (portraiture). DOF down to the end of the road, but the subject held with a generous frame that lets me bring so much in to the story. The second picture is with the M8 + 75 Lux at f2. It's doing a different job and it was essential for the picture I'd made in my head before I touched the shutter that the book shelf behind and the clothing in the subject were pushed as for OOF as possible.

So now I've got a new tool that I can carry all the time and that I'm going to have to learn. I find I prefer its rendering in B&W, especially at 400 and higher, I'm sure that it won't replace other tools that I have to hand, but I'm beginning to appreciate what it has to to offer.

(and BTW - did anyone have thoughts on using the GR2 as a spot meter for use with other cameras? I'm going to play with this and see what it gives - interested to know if anyone's tried it...)

Best

Chris

 

[Mitchell]

Hi Sean,

Thanks for your response. Yes it's Mitchell form Maine, a beautiful 9 degrees with 6 inches of snow, and a big storm coming tomorrow. I'm guessing colder and more snow in Vermont, one of my favorite states.

My GRD II arrived yesterday in time for the weekend. The box felt amazing light. Inside was the case, and finder, no camera. What a tease!!!!
Pop Flash was great about it, and are sending the camera as fast as they can, but in the sticks here that means Monday.

I've done mostly landscapes where most of the time everything is in focus (but some of the most interesting with narrow focus.) So the GRD II for mostly people will be a big learning experience all the way around. I've read your ideas before on the differences in range finder and SLR viewing, and find myself advantages to both. (I'm a little amazed that I don't use the dof preview more often on an SLR, but I think it's because it gets too dark.)

I am in the process of reading your helpful articles on shooting.

Best,

Mitchell

 

[Sean_Reid]

Hi Mitchell,

You wrote:

"Thanks for your response. Yes it's Mitchell form Maine, a beautiful 9 degrees with 6 inches of snow, and a big storm coming tomorrow. I'm guessing colder and more snow in Vermont, one of my favorite states."

I'm told that same storm is going to drop as much as 15" here.

"My GRD II arrived yesterday in time for the weekend. The box felt amazing light. Inside was the case, and finder, no camera. What a tease!!!!
Pop Flash was great about it, and are sending the camera as fast as they can, but in the sticks here that means Monday."

Wow, the GX100 I sent them was stolen enroute. UPS did cover the insured amount. Wierd....was that sent by Fedex?

"I've done mostly landscapes where most of the time everything is in focus (but some of the most interesting with narrow focus.) So the GRD II for mostly people will be a big learning experience all the way around. I've read your ideas before on the differences in range finder and SLR viewing, and find myself advantages to both."

Me too.

"(I'm a little amazed that I don't use the dof preview more often on an SLR, but I think it's because it gets too dark.)"

I think its rare that anyone uses it. Some cameras don't even have it.

"I am in the process of reading your helpful articles on shooting."

Cool, which ones?

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Mitch Alland]

...I find I prefer its rendering in B&W, especially at 400 and higher...

Chris:

Yes, I also like the B&W from the GRD2 at ISO400 and 800; and I'm still struggling with how to use ISO200, or whether to use my old GRD for that rather than selling it because I like that speed on the latter camera more than on the GRD.

I like both your portraits. Of course one shoots portraits differently with a 28mm lens. Here is a picture that I've posted before — it's on the my early GRD photos, shot in JPG before I knew what RAW was. The highlights in the back are completely blown because, as you can see from the watch, it was noon on a fay that was extremely bright even for Bangkok:

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

 

[chris_tribble]

Mitch - interesting to see that you'd chosen square format for this - it makes a good image. Something I might consider more with the GR2...

Still working out where I go with the colour side of things - I process in Lightroom and am finding the low ISO colour from the GR2 pleasing (see below). This is St Pancras station just across the road from home - early evening light - and remarkably true. Shot at 100 iso. It's beginning to feel that there'll be space for it as a highly portabale low iso colour tool + as a distinctive B&W tool with the higher iso's.

Best

Chris

 

[LFPhoto]

Thanks for your interesting posts Chris. The extreme DOF takes some getting used to and is a limitation of the camera if you like to use subject isolation in your photographic style. Although no one has mentioned it above, it's because the focal length of the lens is only 5.9mm. Plug that figure into a DOF calculator and you will see how quickly the DOF increases with focal distance even at f2.4. With regard to your comment of using the GRD as a spotmeter, that is exactly what I do when shotting with my hassy 553 or digiflex. I match up the ISO, aperture (or shutter speed), and WB and use spot meter mode, and it is fairly accurate. However I would first test the GRD2 against the other camera (or film stock) at comparable ISOs to correlate the exposure levels. I have a GRD and not the II, and my mf digital back has only one ISO of 100, so it works well. Brian

 

[Maggie O]

Chris, that's a lovely photo! The colors are fabbo!

Here's one of my M8 Paris shots, as an echo, such as it is: