View Full Version : Portraits with Leica M?
dave lackey
03-28-2007, 02:10
Well, just went off the deep-end and committed to purchasing my mentor's entire studio set-up thanks to his pending divorce. :confused:
So, now, am looking for a space near la casa to work in. In the meantime, I have an M6 coming my way courtesy of KEH. My question of the day is, "Has anyone done portrait work in the studio with their Leica M and can they show some results?"
The idea of using the Leica is exciting so, I hope I am not disappointed! :rolleyes:
Thanks in advance,
http://www.35millimetri.net/images/Portraits/MM04-book60.jpg
summicron 50
http://www.35millimetri.net/images/Portraits/MM04-book36.jpg
summicron 50
http://www.35millimetri.net/images/Portraits/MM05-Portrait003.jpg
summicron 50
not a portrait but in studio
http://www.35millimetri.net/images/Varie_BN/MM05-BW000.jpg
summicron 35
ciao
Great examples!
The last one is my favourite.
Perspective, tonal range.
Best regards,
Uwe
Beautiful studio work max35mm!
dave lackey
03-28-2007, 03:31
Ahhh...now THAT is what I was hoping for!!! Love it...
:D :D
BTW, what film were you using?
:o :o :o :)
thanks all, you are very kind.
film....it should be neopan 400, this evening I'll look the strips.
SLR's are much better studio / portrait cameras in my view. Under ideal / studio conditions the RF is no advantage and the lack of accurate framing is an issue for me. I've used my M's but like my Nikon SLR's much better if I'm shooting 35mm.
SLR's are much better studio / portrait cameras in my view. Under ideal / studio conditions the RF is no advantage and the lack of accurate framing is an issue for me. I've used my M's but like my Nikon SLR's much better if I'm shooting 35mm.
I'll go a step farther than x-ray and say that if you are in a studio, MF cameras are much better than 35mm. The portability advantage that 35mm cameras offer is not necessary in the studio.
merciful
03-28-2007, 04:18
Only time I've ever shot with studio lights, not bad under the circumstances, I think. TX at 3200, Nikkor 85/2.
Todd.Hanz
03-28-2007, 05:01
some excellent examples here.
the only one I could find is this one of my nephew, taken with an M6, handheld meter and one light (I think), M6 + 90/2 summicron.
Benjamin Marks
03-28-2007, 05:50
I'm with FrankS on this one. I realize that we are in RF land here, but let me make a heretical suggestion. If you're working with strobes in a studio setting, I'd find something in medium format with a leaf shutter (e.g. Mamiya C330) to work with. They can synch at any shutter speed and, in my opinion, the increase in quality moving from 35mm to MF beats any change in quality among brands within 35mm. The best lens in 35mm that I have used is the 50 Summilux Asph, but for the price of that lens, you could get a very nice used Mamiya C330 system (or even a used RB67 system) that will just blow it away in terms of image quality at any reasonable print size!
Post deleted by posters request
One thing about studio work, unless you are doing this as a hobby and/or relatively "budget," is that you need have the equipment that compares favorably to your competitors. I met recently with a guy in SF that has his own studio and, while he much prefers to work with his hasselblad for his personal work, he uses a Canon 1Ds for his studio stuff. That' what his competitors use, so that's what he uses.
Using a Leica M, with the possibility of insufficient sync speeds and other factors, does not add up well.
just my 2 cents.
allan
I'd rather use my DSLR for studio shots than my Leica M. The main reason for me is that I like to play around with lighting and I'm not very good at calculating camera settings in accordance with the lighting setups.
ywenz, this is not a comment or slight on you, just a thought raised by your post:
I'm wondering if the younger digital photographers will ever learn "the basics" since they really don't need to due to the instant feedback of digital and the automation of modern cameras.
the first and second - kodak tri-x
third - neopan 400
embrace - neopan acros 100
all in D-76
ciao
rogue_designer
03-28-2007, 12:04
I'd rather use my DSLR for studio shots than my Leica M. The main reason for me is that I like to play around with lighting and I'm not very good at calculating camera settings in accordance with the lighting setups.
A flash meter is your friend.
A flash meter is critical, but there is something to be said for using a dSLR as a "polaroid," if you will. strobist.blogspot.com describes this method, in his particular field of photojournalism, very well.
When I use my digital this way, I just keep chatting with the client while firing off test shots. Usually I have my 1 umbrella'ed flash dialed in after just 2 shots (I can guestimate pretty closely now), and all the while the pointing of the camera makes the subject a bit more relaxed.
If I had a multi-light setup I would definitely want a flash meter, unless I wanted them both to be key and have basically no shadows.
allan
Massimo, D-76 1:1 or full-strength?
Beautiful pictures! Thanks, Vic
Massimo, D-76 1:1 or full-strength?
Beautiful pictures! Thanks, Vic
full-strenght as I usually do.
thanks! ciao
I played around a little bit in the studio with yashica gsn, not really a leica m but as close as I had back then, yes you can do studio portraits with a rangefinder and they look great, no its not the best for getting exact framing but if you understand the quirks of your camera it doesn't mater
The only compelling reason I would have to choose any rangefinder over an SLR in a formal portrait studio would be for the quality and character of the lenses I had for it. Depth-of-field preview alone makes an SLR stand out in this regard, for me, at least. The framing issue, as well, though I've always tended to crop the hell out of my portraits. With that said, Our Man In Milan above has shown that a pocketful of Summicrae and an M-mount body aren't necessarily a handicap.
I'm planning to shoot a local writer's "author photo" next month, and for that mixed indoor/outdoor candid shoot, I plan to use the CL, the 40mm Summicron, and the 50mm Summilux. Less bulky than my SLR, easier to hold slower speeds with in the dim light I plan to place her in, and way better glass than what I have in reflex right now.
dave lackey
03-29-2007, 08:25
Good information so far!
The photos posted have been great. Very helpful. In fact, it is so much better to see actual results so I can make up my own mind. Some have made up their mind that RF's are not for portraits, some have made up their mind that SLR's are not for portraits...yet, I seen some great results with the RF and I obtain VERY good results with my DSLR. If I can get at least this good with the M6, I will be happy:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/uploads/10945/DSC0062.JPG
YMMV, but I think the RF images I have seen are different that those I have seen with other cameras, be it digital or film. And different is okay with me!:)
So, keep the images comin'...I am impressed!
Some have made up their mind that RF's are not for portraits...
That's not what I said. I said that there are better camera choices for studio portraits than a 35mm RF camera. As for RF portraits being different than portraits taken with other cameras, I disagree. It is the photographer that is responsible for the look, not the camera.
nobody has said that rf 's are not for portraits because that statement can not be true...one for all "An Inner Silence: The Portraits of Henri Cartier-Bresson" great book.
Maybe rf's are not the best for studio works, but...who cares,
I pretend not to know it :D :D :D
the last one...
thnaks and ciao!
M3 + Summarit:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=22241
Gabriel M.A.
03-29-2007, 14:46
Don't forget how great they are with just available light:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/79/251345019_5884a888f9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabrielma/251345019/)
Leica M3 + 90mm Elmarit I
Wayne R. Scott
03-29-2007, 14:56
Features that I like when using an M for studio people shots:
1). I can tell instantly if the flash(s) went off, there is no screen black out from slr mirror.
2). I can see the expression on their faces at the moment of shutter release, agian due to no screen black out from slr mirror.
3). I can shoot 36 shots with out reloading.
Things I do not like about using an M in studio:
1). The PC flash connection is on the back of the camera near the view finder, (whoever dreamed this up should have been fired).
2.) To use the camera on a tripod I have to use a M grip to get the tripod mount centered under the body instead of off to one side of the camera.
3). There can be parralax errors in the heat of battle at close range, i.e. some people get their heads cut off. This is not normally a good thing in portraiture.
4). The negative is teeny-tiny compared to medium format or large format.
5). If macro (micro for you Nikon users) type close-ups of hands, rings, baby toes and ears are called for, it ain't gonna happen with the M. At least not easily or cheaply!
6). There are no pictures being made while I am holding the bottom plate in my teeth and threading the film through the bottom of the camera.
Almost any camera can be used to take portraits, some are just much better than others.
Wayne
dave lackey
03-29-2007, 15:33
:) Some have made up their mind that RF's are not for portraits...
That's not what I said. I said that there are better camera choices for studio portraits than a 35mm RF camera. As for RF portraits being different than portraits taken with other cameras, I disagree. It is the photographer that is responsible for the look, not the camera.
Frank,
I am only saying that I would like to see images made with Leica M cameras. To me, and it is only an opinion of mine after 35 years with Nikon SLR's, my images with film cameras are different than the images I obtain with my D2H or D80. Just my observation and that is why I just want to see images made with a different type of camera. Some are saying the images are better with MF...okay, whatever. They are still different aren't they?
Again, I have no problem with everyone's opinions...I merely asked to see Leica M images.:angel: The one's I have seen certainly appear different to me than those on the Miranda forum! And different from my results, too...
As far as the photographer being responsible for the look, I agree, but I do obtain different results with my F3 film than my DSLR. Maybe one day I will be able to venture into MF land and experience that wonderful format, but financially, I don't see that happening...:confused:
I really appreciate all of your opinions...that is what is so great about this forum.
Thanks so much!
Apologies for coming in late - but I've never really been unhappy with M portraits even though I use an SLR as well - almost seems as if the M is less intimidating for some people.
Here's an example that moree than satisfied my needs - hand held with an 90 Apo on an M6 using XP2.
Post deleted by posters request
merciful
03-30-2007, 08:18
A studio shot?
Apologies for coming in late - but I've never really been unhappy with M portraits even though I use an SLR as well - almost seems as if the M is less intimidating for some people.
Here's an example that moree than satisfied my needs - hand held with an 90 Apo on an M6 using XP2.
Merciful, love your sig. Heinlein is (was) THE MAN.
Here's a snapshot, not a studio portrait, of my daughter taken in available indoor light with an M3 + Summitar and Ilford XP2. I've been messing around in Photoshop a little too much lately and added the black background. Anyway,
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/170/439396204_5b647d08d4.jpg
BTW, what's the secret code to upload photos to the RFF gallery? I've been totally unsuccesful for months, even though the photos are sized correctly, and I always get a message that my photos were successfully uploaded. When I check the gallery, however, they are not there.
Here's (http://5063.com/archives/350) a portrait of David Lynch, shot in Copenhagen a couple of weeks ago. M 3, Summicron 50, wide open, Tri-X, Rodinal 1 - 50.
merciful
03-30-2007, 10:57
The focus of this thread has been lost. It's not about whether or not Ms are good for portraits (we all know they are), but whether or not they're well-suited to studio portraiture.
ywenz, this is not a comment or slight on you, just a thought raised by your post:
I'm wondering if the younger digital photographers will ever learn "the basics" since they really don't need to due to the instant feedback of digital and the automation of modern cameras.
The immediate feedback of digital cameras definitely diminishes the need to learn the basics. I don't see that as a good thing, but that is a fact. This however, doesn't mean younger digital shooters are lacking sound photographic skills. What they might not be learning from the photography books, they're learning from trial and error.
A flash meter is your friend.
Correct as well, however, when multiple lights are used, it makes it even more difficult to calculate light falloff and camera settings. I'd rather have instant preview and adjust as needed. If I'm way off on my lights/camera setting, it usually takes me 3 or 4 test shots to arrive at what i want.
The bulk of my lit portraits are shot on digital. However, if I really need a shot on film, I would shot it with digital first and transfer the camera settings to my TLR. I don't see myself deviating from this workflow unless the majority of my shooting is on film.
Tri-x & 50/1.4 ASPH. I used a canon 550EX in a softbox attached to an MP via an off-shoe chord. Shutter was triggered via a cable release.
http://ricci-nash.smugmug.com/photos/127618602-M.jpg
Two more, but I cheated and used my R-D1 with a 28mm VC/1.9 Ultron. On-shoe canon 550EX used as fill flash and remotely triggered a 580EX in a softbox. Portraits can be done with an M system, and you CAN utilize a Canon wireless flash setup on the M's (in manual mode, of course).
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/159/425485149_f52d572021.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_n/425485149/)
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/172/427492639_5bd89f728c.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_n/427492639/)
Merciful - It isn't a studio shot - I realised after posting that the original question was specifically about studio shots. My mistake.
dave lackey
03-31-2007, 02:55
PaulN,
Nice!
Have you tried to use the M flash to trigger the strobes?
I have just picked up the studio setup (3 lights) including softboxes. All that is missing is the microsync and a light meter.
BTW, just how hard is it to do studio portraits of pets? Our grandchildren are definitely a handful!
:eek:
Here's (http://5063.com/archives/350) a portrait of David Lynch, shot in Copenhagen a couple of weeks ago. M 3, Summicron 50, wide open, Tri-X, Rodinal 1 - 50.
not in studio, but WOW!
merciful
03-31-2007, 08:04
Hey, no big deal at all, I was just trying to figure out that background. Thanks.
Merciful - It isn't a studio shot - I realised after posting that the original question was specifically about studio shots. My mistake.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.