View Full Version : Nikon, Canon and Leica
Having last night attended an official D3 and D300 preview evening, I've been thinking a lot about the tools of the trade...
Now, having given up on my M8's some time ago, and allowing myself some distance and time to think about my experiences with the camera, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that apart from a film M (which I've gone back to in conjunction with a Mamiya 7ii) the M8 would still be the best digital camera for me to invest in for use in the style of work I like.
Handling the new Nikon's and the new lineup of lenses, I couldn't help but be impressed with their build quality, features, screens and high ISO performance. To be honest, I think the build quality of the Nikon's is far better than that of the M8. But, and there is a massive "but..." I don't need 99% of the features they've packed into them. I don't want or need zoom lenses. I don't need to shoot wirelessly with five camera's positioned around a room or live view. Who needs 9 frames per second for candid photography?
I sat there with the D300 in my hand and thought to myself, "this is a great camera," but it's not what I need. It's a great and versitle tool but it's a rather large space station. It's too confusing and takes away the fun of it all. If they made an FM2 with a D300 sensor inside it I'd buy it in a heartbeat, but they won't. The M8 may not be perfect, and I personally don't regret getting rid of mine, but it's the most intuitive and unintimidating digi camera on the market short of a point and shoot.
Thinking about my wish list for Leica, I would say they must address the IR issue and battery life (500 shots is not good, 2000 shots, like the D2x routinely takes with one battery is.) I don't care for more than 12MP. Nikon have the count right, IMHO, especially with regards to how it relates to high ISO noise. Full frame would be good but not necessary. A quieter shutter wind on is needed.
Anyway, I've written enough rambling nonsense for one day. My only point is really that one mans junk is anothers treasure.
M. Valdemar
11-27-2007, 18:19
I agree that the DSLR's are getting too big, heavy and with too many things jammed into them.
My ideal camera would be an FE2 with a D3 sensor.
But the people on this forum are not the target audience for these things.
If you want to see the target audience, THIS Canon forum is like a Bizarro twin of RFF. It's composed of thousands of wild-eyed ignoramuses seemingly born yesterday who want to do nothing but spend tens of thousands of dollars on the latest and greatest.
Reading it and comprehending these people is a revelation:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=33
nikonhswebmaster
11-27-2007, 18:46
I just hate Nikon DSLRs. I just cannot stand any electronics which do not intuitively reveal themselves to me. These things try to pack photoshop into the camera, it is a maddening approach to image manipulation.
However I suppose you can turn most of it off, shoot Raw and pretend you don't know about its many "features." I am sticking with my Lumix/Olympus camera for now.
I have used a canon 20D for some time and I must say I found it a lot easier to use the a nikon d200, the d200 has a hundred buttons on it and the 20D seems somehow simplified to how I like it. Plus I dont use half the buttons on there anyway so I can easily ignore the rest. That said I too was thinking if nikon stuck a D3 sensor or something like that in the body of the FM3 with a easier to see light meter then I would be sold. Why the heck do pro digital cameras need to be so damn big???
But also I have to comment, my 20D has lasted about 3 years now, its shutter button is pretty much worn down to a nub and needs replacing soon. The outside black paint stuff has worn through in a lot of places, but I still think that out on a long trip I trust it more then I would trust an M8 to make it back from the trip in one piece.
I love my M8, but I am very excited to get my D3 and D300 in a few days. 10 new lenses, super low light ability, awesome Zeiss primes...but then again I get paid to use this stuff.
It's fun stuff, no need for me to bash it.
Paul Kay
11-28-2007, 00:54
I use Canon 1D series professionally - superb cameras and lenses (well some - despite what you might read) - but they require a different mindset to using the M8. I quite simply shoot the M8 differently but refuse to make comparisons because the Canon's (and Nikons) are used in completely different ways.
Weight in dSLRs is an issue though - I'd say that there'd be a good or even substantial market for the equivalent of an FM2D too simply because a lot of photography doesn't require the high spec of current 'pro' dSLRs, but does require a lighter, robust, reliable camera and I find many of the existing lighter weight ones appear to be simply too fragile!
Nikon Bob
11-28-2007, 02:44
Another vote for something like an FM2D with the D3 sensor. It would be just what I need and nothing more.
Bob
You can use older manual lenses on the Nikon DSLR bodies, with manual aperture rings. If the settings are palced on M, that leaves only the shutter selection set by digital.
M. Valdemar
11-28-2007, 02:57
It's not the complexity that bothers me, it's that the cameras have become such heavy behemoths.
I'm too old to carry around 10 pounds of camera and lenses.
wgerrard
11-28-2007, 04:55
I use my DSLR so occasionally that I usually need to scan the manual first. That may say more about me than the camera's complexity, though.
However, I wander how many folks -- non-pros -- actually use all the features of the big expensive DSLR's. How many are attracted by the automation, but are later chagrined to find out that all those features require some decision making?
I saw the same thing happen before digital when people could get their hands on automatic film SLR's. Folks bought a camera and used it enthusiastically for a period of time. Then, perhaps faced with the need to learn something about photography, but certainly with waning enthusiasm, they put the camera in a closet, to use only a few times a year, on full automatic, for snapshots.
KM-25, I hate you! Keep us posted on D3 thing.... ;):)
Sitemistic, you right all the way!:)
If needed, One can even turn the display off and see what he/She did when the card is full, and all in manual mode. Hey even use an external light meter.
I use a Finepix F11 with a broken LCD like that.
Looking to my d200 and my Bessa R2S.. they are not that different in weight, and if you set up a 85cm on the R2S it easily out weight the D200 with a 18-135... if you use a D40x than, even the R2S or the Nikon S look and feel much bigger.
I do apologize but regarding cameras, I'm not that fundamentalist.. (unless is Canon, nah just kidding). I'll try to use even my Agfamatic 50 if I could find a 126 cartridge.
I have a 20D and no problem with its complexity. I can shoot it in aperture-priority or manual just like my M8. I don't know or care what half of the buttons and settings are. But even with the "kit" 18-55 zoom, or a couple of light primes, it takes up more room requiring a bulkier bag, and no way I can fit it into my coat pocket like I can the M8 once I take off the lens. For me as a traveller the choice therefore isn't between the M8 and a DSLR, it's between the M8 and a compact digital like the DLux-3 or similar. Now those puppies are a collossal pain in the backside to use manually:bang:
Richard Marks
11-28-2007, 07:17
We still continue to compare the M8 with digi SLR's. Its just not logical. You might as well compare an M6 with a Nikon F5 (both great in different ways).
If you want a rangefinder and you want digital capture then an M8 it is. If you do not value the unique properties or appreciate the unique limitations of a rangefinder then get a DSLR and appreciate its advantages, accepting its limitations.
The dilema I have is a bit simpler, whether or not to use my M8n or my M6 (or which lens to put on each if shooting with both!!
Best wishes
Richard
willie_901
11-28-2007, 08:01
I absolutely despise the complicated, heavy, noisy, user-interface hostile cameras that modern DSLRs have evolved in to.
That said, I was pleasantly surprised by how much my Nikon D200 with an AI/AIS lens is similar in use to my Nikon F3. DSLRs are much more tolerable for me when used without the obligatory, massive, designed to be used in full auto mode, one-zoom-lens-for-everything attached.
The trouble is, you have to sit down and study the manual and thumb through the menus systems to set the D200 up to work like a manual SLR.
Even with my aging eyes, I do not find manual focusing to be a real show stopper.
I'm sure other companies' higher-cost DLSRs can be set up in a similar fashion.
Like others have posted, I would prefer a smaller, less complicated design. I fear this type of product won't be marketed until the DLSR growth curve levels out. There is no motivation right now to mass market the minimalistic DLSR that is wished for so often here, and elsewhere.
willie
shadowfox
11-28-2007, 08:21
"If they made an FM2 with a D300 sensor inside it I'd buy it in a heartbeat"
"My ideal camera would be an FE2 with a D3 sensor."
"That said I too was thinking if nikon stuck a D3 sensor or something like that in the body of the FM3 with a easier to see light meter then I would be sold"
"Another vote for something like an FM2D with the D3 sensor"
I'm just reiterate these sentiments here for google spiders to catch it. :)
As for me, *anyone*, Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, heck even Canon, if they would stick a good CMOS sensor on any of their vintage SLR's, I'll buy it. :D
No LCD, no menus.
Just sharing here...not making a judgement.
I have a friend that wanted a camera, a film camera to be precise. He was new to photography and wanted to go with film rather than digital. Having been a shooter since about the age of 9 with a Ricoh rangefinder, I gave him all the familiar wisdom. You know: buy a hundred rolls and just shoot, shoot slide film of it's more exacting methodology. The typical advice.
He saw my EOS1 camera and loved it. Having an additional EOS-1n, I decided that I would sell it to him for a fair price. Needless to say, he asked me if I would buy it back from him. He named off reasons: too large, not enough auto focus points, different metering characteristics etc. The list went on, he even compared it to his film Rebel that was a lot newer and had 3000 focus points and 15000 point metering.
What did I think? This was a EOS1 camera, that in it's day (which was not too long ago), that was highly sought after by pro's. It's built like a tank and is very reliable. I bought it 10 years ago second hand. It's had only one problem.
For him, the point was that it was not the newest and not the most tricked out...even though he'd probably not use 80 percent of those new features. I bought it back at a discount because I did not want to see such a beautiful thing go to waste.
Now, I have an embarrassingly large collection of cameras (in my opinion). Each of them have their place and their use. I love them all, the complex Canons and the simple Leica's. All of them do what I need them to do...make pictures.
What do you think of this?
1. One photographer said to another in book I recently read..."Most photographers can't even use a box camera to it's maximum capability."
2. While not directly applicable, Willie Mosconi said something about being about to shoot billiards with a broom stick.
Do you think that this is what we are really about here? Do you think that we are all after that perfect 36 shots in a roll...everyshot being at least acceptable to shot to someone other than our mother?
do you know what is the difference between painters and photographers?
painters do not talk about their brushes.
that is what my tutor told me at college today.
i think he is right
at the end of the day is all about the pictures right?
now you can ask why do i bother to right in this thread if i believe the above quote.
and you are right
but i am so bored , have nothing else to do so there you go
xx
panos
painters do not talk about their brushes.
Because there is no decent brushforum.com :p
I have the Nikon D200 and have not been impressed with it at all. I purchased it because i have the Kodak DCS Pro 14, which i love, but it is too slow and the higher ISO is very noisy, hence the D200 because it uses the same lenses and was much faster. I find the color is way off on the Nikon, the Kodak far superior, and the body is too small when using large lenses Since i have purchase the M8 i haven't used anything else and when i look back on my past every outstanding photo i have ever taken was taken with a Leica RF camera and lens. If you need the long lenses i would probably reccommend Canon, though not a canon user, i think they make a superior product.
Anyone who knows painters knows they do often talk about brushes (& paints, etc.), so I wouldn't be surprised if you were able to find lots of "brush & easel" talk on internet painter fora.
Because there is no decent brushforum.com :p
wgerrard
11-28-2007, 12:34
painters do not talk about their brushes.
If brushes were made in Japan and cost hundreds of dollars, or by elves in Germany and cost thousands, I'm sure painters would argue the merits of their favorites. ;)
People do tend to get their egos invested in the hardware they buy.
I have to admit...I was an animator in another life...Everyone in the business know there is only one pencil to draft with. If I remember correctly, they were called "Black Beauty". They had a beatiful quality of being silky smooth. You could lay down a line with minimal pressure and easily control the line weight.
Hearing that they were going to stop making them, I grabbed a few from the stock room every week. I think I have a bunch of them hoarded at home in my art box.
Ultimately, the TOMBOW pencils became more popular. Their B and 2B's were comparable to the Black Beauties. They were good, but just not the same.
And, yes we did discuss techniques. You had the younger guys that took the easy way out and built up the line weight with the 0.3 mechanical pencils and the mid career and older ones that used the Tombows and Black Beauty. You really had to use your whole body to get your sandwich holder to guide the pencil just right.
Ahhh...those days.
The set of chisels I have costs more then a nice router. When I have the time, I like using the chisels. When I don't, the router and table is really nice. Both require skill, and you can create an effective joint with both. You can also screw up and waste lotsa nice wood with both tools. Either way, not letting them rust is important. How's that for a non sequitur.....
LeicaTom
11-28-2007, 14:34
Leica M digiback...........
That would slove many people`s problems ;)
It`s coming someday soon :D Stay Tuned!
Tom
I don't know or care what half of the buttons and settings are.
But one of the great things about all those buttons is that once your fingers learn where the buttons are you can do astonishing things, like change the ISO, image quality, white balance, image mode, burst rate, exposure comp, etc., without having to cycle through a bunch of menus. The other fantastic advantage of a DSLR is that the lens can talk to the camera and the camera can talk to the lens. If you use a coded lens on the M8, it can talk to the camera too, but about all it can say is: "Duh!."
You're right, though, a rangefinder is smaller, easier to carry, and more effective on the street. Those qualities can be worth a lot. Each kind of camera has its place. Trying to compare a DSLR to a rangefinder only makes sense with reference to the kind of work you're trying to do.
Comparing Hummers to Porsches again?
From Leica literature, 1957:
"The fact that Leica offers both the traditionl rangefinder system and a reflex system is based on Leica photographers being well enough versed in the science of photographic theory to be able to use both systems side by side, each for the fields where it is best suited. "
Nothing has changed in the last 50 years....
Really? I love my M8, but I see a Canon 1ds mrkIII and a nikon D3 I slap myself sometimes. Both are incredible cameras, very capable of any task you throw at it.
I find myself in a lot of positions where I wish I had more then my M8 has to offer.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love my M8.
Interesting.
Today I took a few photos with a pre-release 1ds MkIII. I only bothered taking 1600 ISO shots as to me I'm not interested in the pixel count, just high ISO performance. To be honest, it's not much better than the M8 at 1250ISO. It is better but not remarkably.
I think that the Nikon's are going to eat the Canon's the next few years. Leica, too, are on the right track. Understand that this is a pretty big thing for me to say considering my past anamosity over my m8 experience.
I find myself in a lot of positions where I wish I had more then my M8 has to offer.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love my M8.
Which is exactly why I'm looking for a DMR.
do you know what is the difference between painters and photographers?
painters do not talk about their brushes.
I spent the last 4 years in art college, my girlfriend is a painter as well as a photographer, that statement is so wrong. On top of that my 65 year old sculptor talks about his tools and what not that he makes himself all the time. In fact i got a box of them sitting in my living room because he doesn't have anywhere to put the damn things!
WTF? We painters do talk about brushes. Painting is a very physical medium, and I have had many conversations with other artists about a gigantic range of issues particular to slapping paint onto canvas or board: binders, studio lighting, toxicity, just to name a few that immediately spring to mind. And we most definitely discuss the inadequacy(!) of our brushes. I suspect watercolorists are the worst obssessors about brushes, and I'm not in that group.
I have a D40 and a couple of MF cameras. The D40 is a competent little machine, but it's not nearly as much fun as my SLR/TLR MF cameras. I like my D40; I love my Rollei. That said, I could get used to a donated M8!
Digital Dude
11-29-2007, 05:26
As a new M8 owner, I was tempted to choose the D3 with all its glorified features and superior quality. However, the ballistic missile launch codes and switches would see little use in the hands of this glorified novice. The M8 by contrast is soOoo much more intuitive and manageable. The form factor is what initially appealed to me despite its rather dense weight. With the grip attached, I find the M8 and it’s functions to be excellent.
Regards,:rolleyes:
shadowfox
11-29-2007, 08:14
... and oh by the way, cooks do talk about their pans and grills and spatulas ...
... and don't get me started with musicians ...
we photographers are just cleaner ... mostly :D
Photon42
11-29-2007, 08:52
My ideal camera would be an FE2 with a D3 sensor.
F2, of course :angel:
Which is exactly why I'm looking for a DMR.
That's why I'm looking at a 1DS Mark II :bang:
If I was going to buy a dslr I would buy a D300 and a few Zeiss lenses. It seemed a great camera and definatly worth the hype it's receiving, even if it doesn't have the same technology in the CMOS chip the D3 has.
Could have sold you an "as new" 1ds MkII last week for as little as $3000US. It has less than 1000 frames taken on it. It's gone now, though.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.