Rolleicord vs. Leica M3 - totally unscientific comparison

[tunalegs]

I prefer the one shot with the Leica. Not because it was made by a Leica, but because it is rather more well composed compared to the shot taken with the rollei.

The old saying "it's not the camera..." certainly rings true here.

[msbarnes]

Originally Posted by tunalegs

I prefer the one shot with the Leica. Not because it was made by a Leica, but because it is rather more well composed compared to the shot taken with the rollei.

The old saying "it's not the camera..." certainly rings true here.

I agree. They are two very different pictures.

[ColSebastianMoran]

Sean Moran, I've done this several times. Best to shoot the same day, in the same light. Maybe from the same tripod.

I, too, am curious to see the images.

[mfunnell]

Originally Posted by tunalegs

I prefer the one shot with the Leica. Not because it was made by a Leica, but because it is rather more well composed compared to the shot taken with the rollei.

I agree. The composition used in the Leica shot has something going for it, while the Rollei photo looks (to me) somehow awkward. I don't think that has anything to do with the camera or rectangular vs square frames. I think one photo is just plain better than the other.

...Mike

[aldenfender]

I think the car in the bottom left of the first balances out the composition. The second shot is too tightly framed... Simply there's more going on in the first, after looking around a bit your eyes then set on the subject with the pleasant lighting.

Hope that comes out making sense.

[Sanders McNew]

The difference isn't in the cameras. It's in the poor use
of the square. The square's foreground -- nearly a third
of the frame -- is empty roadbed. Had you tilted the
camera up, so that the curb was at the bottom of your
frame, and more of the light streaming through the tree
was visible at the top of the frame, you might have made
something remarkable.

I completely disagree with the people who are saying that
the rectangle somehow is more "energetic" or pleasing
than the square. I like HCB. I like Doisneau. One shot
rectangles, the other squares. Both work. The energy comes
from the composition, not the frame.

[Summicronj]

I too am of the opinion that what makes the leica picture more appealing is the person beyond the fountain, the car and the natural framing. There is so much happening

However I believe your point of your experiment was to determine if you require medium format AND 35 mm to satisfy your photographic needs. This small unscientific test shows that you personally don't need both. It's great to be able to simplify... especially for travel.

[Rayt]

Originally Posted by Sanders McNew

The difference isn't in the cameras. It's in the poor use
of the square. The square's foreground -- nearly a third
of the frame -- is empty roadbed. Had you tilted the
camera up, so that the curb was at the bottom of your
frame, and more of the light streaming through the tree
was visible at the top of the frame, you might have made
something remarkable.

I completely disagree with the people who are saying that
the rectangle somehow is more "energetic" or pleasing
than the square. I like HCB. I like Doisneau. One shot
rectangles, the other squares. Both work. The energy comes
from the composition, not the frame.

My feelings exactly.

[FrankS]

This is not about the camera (Leica vs Rolleicord), it is about the composition of this particular scene, where, in this case, the horizontal rectangle works better than the square frame.

[Uncle Bill]

Originally Posted by Sean Moran

Hello Again,

As you requested ... here are the two photographs we have been discussing. I haven't processed them at all, apart from shrinking them to a reasonable size and saving as JPEGs.

Neither is great, but which do you prefer?

Sean.

Hi Sean,

I own both a Rolleicord and a Leica M3. Now having done some printing tonight from some negs I shot in NYC this past spring on a Rolleicord. On the surface I say I got some really nice prints. That being said I just uploaded a shot to the gallery this evening that is every bit as powerful, even as a negative scan.

What I'm saying is, I like both cameras, they both make great photographs, end of story.

[leicapixie]

i have similar results.
Using a newish Pentax 67 with 55mm wide angle(=28mm in 35) and my old Spotmatic with 28 Super Takumar, i found the 35mm sharper and clearer than the 67! Print size about 8 x 10". The 35mm was about 6 x 9".
OH !, the 67 on tripod! I think i preferred using my 35mm SLR vs the Sumo Wrestler Extravaganza! Making very big prints would favor the 67..

[ferider]

The person in the first picture (and the car) make a huge difference.

Consider this:





Which do you prefer ?

Roland.

[Platinum RF]

Originally Posted by ferider

The person in the first picture (and the car) make a huge difference.

Consider this:




Which do you prefer ?

Roland.

Which do you prefer ? First

[xayraa33]

The Rolleicord photo is more Eugene Atget versus the Robert Frank type Leica shot.
Both are good but each is a different photograph regardless of the location setting.

[Dan Daniel]

Originally Posted by Sanders McNew

I completely disagree with the people who are saying that the rectangle somehow is more "energetic" or pleasing than the square. I like HCB. I like Doisneau. One shot rectangles, the other squares. Both work. The energy comes from the composition, not the frame.

Just a small point of correction: Doisneau may have shot 6x6 cameras, Rolleiflexes, for much of his career, but he more often than not cropped to other formats. And often cropped the same negative differently as time went on. And adopted 35mm in the late '50s or early 60s. And shot other formats throughout his career. The number of square images you will see by him is rather small.

[SakamakuAme]

The answer is easy.

OP was trying to mimic the beautiful experienece of the first evening with different camera. If the Rollei was the first camera, and the Leica was the second, the result would be opposit. The copy can't be better than the original.

[raphaelaaron]

as someone first said before the images were put up

it has to do with the format...but moreover since the images have been posted, it's also dependent on the activity the leica image format captured that the rollei did not.

thanks for posting the images. it adds a lot to the conversation on how cameras and formats can change a seemingly similar scene into two very different pictures.

[TLRgraphy]

Originally Posted by Sean Moran

Hello Again,

As you requested ... here are the two photographs we have been discussing. I haven't processed them at all, apart from shrinking them to a reasonable size and saving as JPEGs.

Neither is great, but which do you prefer?

Sean.

i also like the m3 photo. the square format makes it a bit crowd in terms of framing. perhaps if you move back for a few steps and then take the shot with rolleicord, it could be nicer. just my two cents