Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M9 / ME

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 12-27-2019   #41
Derek Leath
Registered User
 
Derek Leath's Avatar
 
Derek Leath is offline
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
$1600 + tax and shipping? So what was the total? $1900?
That is a huge amount of money to get a Digital cam back up and running, when for a few hundred dollars more you can buy a much better M240.

I had the M-E, and now the M240. I honestly think that those who see the magic difference in the sensors would not be able to tell the difference in a blind test. But once you raise the ISO above 800 you sure will. Or once you take a picture and feel the difference in shutter action and sound. Or check out battery life. Or use Live View (absolutely fantastic to instantly see if your RF is correctly calibrated). Or need more pixels than 18mb. Or actually want to use the rear LCD to see if your focus is correct when you chimp. It is atrocious on the M8/9 series.

Leica Digital kameras are disposable items with short parts availability compared to mechanical cameras. The smart thing to do is buy the most modern one you can afford if you want the longest life out of it.
Leica Charged me $1595 for a new sensor, CLA, new leather covering, plus a year warranty. I think shipping was $25-30 for 2nd day USPS.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #42
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pál_K View Post
This is the first time I've ever heard of "sensor corrosion". What causes this - excess humidity? Is the M9's sensor more susceptible than those of other digital cameras?
The cause is an ill-chosen IR filter film material in the sensor cover glass.

While this IR filter film is very thin and efficient, it reacts with water vapor. Excess humidity is not the problem. The problem is the chemical properties of the IR filter layer. Depending on the extent of sensor assembly thermal stress, the environment and other factors, all original M9 sensors will develop optical imperfections in the sensor cover glass. The only variable is how fast will symptoms appear and how quickly will the affected areas grow. If an original M9 was not used often, its sensor assembly has a low number of thermal expansion/contraction cycles. So the odds are optical corrosion will not be present.

The only camera with this particular problem is the M9. Leica's goal was to replicate the experience of using a film M camera. One criteria was a body width that was as close to a M film camera as possible without sacrificing optical performance. A thin, efficient IR filter film helped meet this goal.

Other Leica digital M cameras use a thin and inert IR filter layer material.

Years ago a few other brands experienced other types of cover glass delimitation problems that are unrelated to water-vapor penetration. The total number of digital cameras (excluding the M9) with any sort of sensor cover-glass failure due to design and, or manufacturing issues is extremely small. Thermal expansion/contraction cycles do not cause premature sensor assembly failures. High humidity environments are not problematic because the IR filter films in all other cameras react very slowly, if at all, with water vapor.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #43
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolaresLarrave View Post
But then... if someone bought a defective M9 and replaced the sensor, wouldn't it be like getting a new-ish camera? At least when it comes to the sensor... which is kind of important.
I would think that most digital cameras do not fail because of the sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #44
DwF
Registered User
 
DwF's Avatar
 
DwF is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Well, seeing a Sony A7II - the entire camera brand new is now $898, it seems Leica is making a pretty penny charging $1800 (shipping and tax included!) to replace a sensor that is way behind in tech.
Of course they sell fewer cameras so have to have a higher price point to make money, butt still.
Huss,

With all due respect, you answer the question regarding what you accurately point out is a disparity in pricing between the Sony. Leica is a small company, but materials and construction (occasional design flaws notwithstanding) of the Leica add to costs......but then there are no plastic battery doors on the M either.

Most importantly, the M provides the rangefinder (and wonderful viewfinder) experience that we simply have to play for. I shoot way better and I am better focused (pun not intended) using the M than any other camera. The M cameras distract less if at all from what I see out front of me that inspires making a picture in the first place; more than any other camera I have used. So for me, the comparison to the Sony from a cost perspective has little bearing here.

I have to add that recently getting the M10, I still really love the handling and hardware aspects of my older M9-M (MM) with quirks and all, and can say for sure, I would consider paying up to service a fairly priced M9 with a corrosion issue. I was fortunate to get in under the wire with my MM but paid 9-month some dues having it sitting in New Jersey during that rush on sensors.

David
__________________
DwF DwF’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #45
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Well, seeing a Sony A7II - the entire camera brand new is now $898, it seems Leica is making a pretty penny charging $1800 (shipping and tax included!) to replace a sensor that is way behind in tech.
Of course they sell fewer cameras so have to have a higher price point to make money, butt still.
Note also that M8 and 9 are long since been discontinued. Being able to get service on them is not a bad thing, and now it shouldn't even cost anything it seems.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #46
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolaresLarrave View Post
But then... if someone bought a defective M9 and replaced the sensor, wouldn't it be like getting a new-ish camera? At least when it comes to the sensor... which is kind of important.
New sensor, old everything else. The shutter has to be expensive to replace (to you not to Leica).

Can you imagine the scandal if a Japanese mfg did this? First knowingly shipped cameras w defective sensors, then denied there was an issue, then claimed lifetime replacement, then cancelled that policy, then upped the charge from $1000 to $1800?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #47
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarski View Post
Note also that M8 and 9 are long since been discontinued. Being able to get service on them is not a bad thing, and now it shouldn't even cost anything it seems.
How do you come up w the free service? Also does Leica still service the M8? I thought parts were no longer available.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #48
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwF View Post
Huss,

With all due respect, you answer the question regarding what you accurately point out is a disparity in pricing between the Sony. Leica is a small company, but materials and construction (occasional design flaws notwithstanding) of the Leica add to costs......but then there are no plastic battery doors on the M either.

Most importantly, the M provides the rangefinder (and wonderful viewfinder) experience that we simply have to play for. I shoot way better and I am better focused (pun not intended) using the M than any other camera. The M cameras distract less if at all from what I see out front of me that inspires making a picture in the first place; more than any other camera I have used. So for me, the comparison to the Sony from a cost perspective has little bearing here.

I have to add that recently getting the M10, I still really love the handling and hardware aspects of my older M9-M (MM) with quirks and all, and can say for sure, I would consider paying up to service a fairly priced M9 with a corrosion issue. I was fortunate to get in under the wire with my MM but paid 9-month some dues having it sitting in New Jersey during that rush on sensors.

David
Don’t get me wrong, I love my film Leicas and my M240 has been rock solid. But I bought that used and after the M9 debacle I would never buy a new Leica again. Failed after 3 months, 6 months to fix w no loaner (or replacement) then the fix had the same defective sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #49
DwF
Registered User
 
DwF's Avatar
 
DwF is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Don’t get me wrong, I love my film Leicas and my M240 has been rock solid. But I bought that used and after the M9 debacle I would never buy a new Leica again. Failed after 3 months, 6 months to fix w no loaner (or replacement) then the fix had the same defective sensor.
That would frustrate me as well if not piss me off! I've never purchased a new Leica M body with exception of a demo M8. I've found service on my Leicas to be pretty good but with sensor replacement I had no loaner for the MM while it was out of service for 9 months. I ended up buying a used Fuji X Pro 2 during that time to keep me going.

I'm just saying that the Sony ad Leicas are so different- price of having a nice rangefinder. I also had one costly repair on my Sony RX1R II (Pop-up EVF).
__________________
DwF DwF’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #50
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
That’s the thing, Leica is the only mfg that essentially makes a film camera with digital back. And that’s all I want from a digital cam (unless I scan film then I have a Z7 for that).
I love the optical rf which is why I still use them. They really are glorious when working, which is why I recommend a used M240 as a great way to get in.
But man if someone else ever made a real digital rf camera, like a modern Zeiss Ikon ZM, I’d be in. I’m kinda surprised Cosina never did as the Ikon could have been a nice base for one.

(And no the Nikon DF is not close to a film camera with a digital back. What a fat, miserable to focus with manual lenses disappointment that was. Tried one, gave it back. And honestly all they had to do was give it a real manual focus screen from the F6).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #51
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
(And no the Nikon DF is not close to a film camera with a digital back. What a fat, miserable to focus with manual lenses disappointment that was. Tried one, gave it back. And honestly all they had to do was give it a real manual focus screen from the F6).
Poor Df... I loved it. I used it with AF lenses though...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #52
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
 
Pál_K's Avatar
 
Pál_K is offline
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Gig Harbor
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
The cause is an ill-chosen IR filter film material in the sensor cover glass.
...
Thank you for the explanation.
__________________
"Great photography is about the visual effect upon the viewer, not sharpness." - Stephen Gandy, Cameraquest
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #53
ZivcoPhoto
Registered User
 
ZivcoPhoto's Avatar
 
ZivcoPhoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 318
Wonder if that was Kodak’s misjudgment or Leica’s - after all, I thought Kodak designed and manufactured the sensor for Leica.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #54
johnmshaw
Registered User
 
johnmshaw is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NORCAL USA
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by james.liam View Post
Makes logical since on a new sensor is $1600.
Thanks for this information, and I think that is a fair deal considering the upgrade cost.
Mine is going to a new home for $650 shipped and he will be having the sensor replaced.
I am now on the hunt for an
M240 or M-P 240.
The only Leica M I have bought new was a film MP many moons ago. I couldn’t imagine laying down the cash for a brand new digital one. Especially after my M9 bit the dust.

Cheers John
__________________
M3, M9
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2019   #55
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
How do you come up w the free service? Also does Leica still service the M8? I thought parts were no longer available.
How do you come up with price levels they should set for their service?

About M8, its not too long ago when I contacted them about fixing sensor with dead pixel(s), answer was yes it was still possible by the factory. Again, not near-free as you seem to expect, so decided its not worth it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #56
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
That’s the thing, Leica is the only mfg that essentially makes a film camera with digital back. And that’s all I want from a digital cam (unless I scan film then I have a Z7 for that).
...
I would say a Leica is the only way to own a digital camera with an analog optical rangefinder with analog focusing. While the Epson RD-1 also has an analog optical rangefinder, these cameras are rare, unsupported and use a Nikon D1 sensor from 1999.

FUJIFILM uses a reverse Galilean design with the X-100 and X-Pro bodies. While this electronic rangefinder (FUJIFILM's description) uses a hybrid analog-digital design, one can compose (and focus) while viewing outside the frame-line estimates using an optical finder. However the focusing aids are digital.

I agree about the Z7. However, any of the recent Nikon DSLRs can be operated as one would operate a F6.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #57
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarski View Post
How do you come up with price levels they should set for their service?

About M8, its not too long ago when I contacted them about fixing sensor with dead pixel(s), answer was yes it was still possible by the factory. Again, not near-free as you seem to expect, so decided its not worth it.
I paid for such an issue with my M8. It was worth it to me.
__________________
- Raid
________________

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #58
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Poor Df... I loved it. I used it with AF lenses though...
The DF was designed to be used as a film camera w a digital back. That’s why Nikon made a big deal about it being compatible with all its F mount lenses including the non AI ones. It’s why they made the aperture feeler flip up out of the way. So the suggestion was that all these old mf lenses would be great with it. But they forgot about the focusing screen. The same old AF screen that was in the 610 (?) which was accurate to maybe f4 manually. Using the digital rangefinder was not of much help as there was far too much play in it. The in focus dot remained lit over a wide focus range relatively speaking.
The D750 had much better manual focusing as the digi rf was tightened up and on the D850 it is just great.
Thing is, if you are using AF lenses with the DF, the 750 has much better Af. So for me, the DF is just.... poor mf, and weak in comparison af. All at a premium price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #59
madNbad
Registered User
 
madNbad's Avatar
 
madNbad is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 761
Owned a Df for a while, it was fine with MF lenses, including non-AI but changed the screen to this:
[IMG]IMG_1475 by Michael DeLuca, on Flickr[/IMG]

Tried it with AF lenses and it felt like carrying a bowling ball.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #60
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Thing is, if you are using AF lenses with the DF, the 750 has much better Af. So for me, the DF is just.... poor mf, and weak in comparison af. All at a premium price.
Yes, you may be right... but I'm a dedicated shutter speed dial type of guy. Also, I do not like DSLR grips generally. The DF had a minimal grip. The Df had the D4 sensor. I just liked it. You expect rationality on RFF forum?

Somehow I was able to photograph with it though... I am not sure how with how bad you make it out to be. At the time I bought it used, the Df and the D750 were the same price. I had no interest in any other DSLR. Still do not. The Df is still my favorite DSLR. I'm sorry Nikon hurt your feelings with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #61
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
 
Pál_K's Avatar
 
Pál_K is offline
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Gig Harbor
Posts: 280
Not sure how we got from the M9 to the Df, but anyway...

Eagerly I anticipated the Df during its pre-introduction tease. Although I applaud Nikon for it, especially the external analog controls, soon I realized it is essentially an F4 with better metering and a digital sensor. My choice was to use my F4's for film, D700 for digital.

For the full analog experience, the M Leicas are hard to beat (Nikon S or Contax also good).

For digital, the external controls and Fuji's hybrid viewfinder, plus the ways it can be customized, appealed to me as well. The Fuji's only fault, for me, is that it is much too easy to inadvertently hit one of the many buttons on the back. So digital M wins there.
__________________
"Great photography is about the visual effect upon the viewer, not sharpness." - Stephen Gandy, Cameraquest
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #62
Ambro51
Collector/Photographer
 
Ambro51's Avatar
 
Ambro51 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 237
Film= new sensor every exposure.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #63
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambro51 View Post
Film= new sensor every exposure.
I think you mean every roll.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #64
james.liam
Registered User
 
james.liam is offline
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Nieuw Amsterdam
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
The DF was designed to be used as a film camera w a digital back. That’s why Nikon made a big deal about it being compatible with all its F mount lenses including the non AI ones. It’s why they made the aperture feeler flip up out of the way. So the suggestion was that all these old mf lenses would be great with it. But they forgot about the focusing screen. The same old AF screen that was in the 610 (?) which was accurate to maybe f4 manually. Using the digital rangefinder was not of much help as there was far too much play in it. The in focus dot remained lit over a wide focus range relatively speaking.
The D750 had much better manual focusing as the digi rf was tightened up and on the D850 it is just great.
Thing is, if you are using AF lenses with the DF, the 750 has much better Af. So for me, the DF is just.... poor mf, and weak in comparison af. All at a premium price.
Spot-on, Huss.
You had your disappointment moment with Leica and the failed sensor, mine was with Nikon and the Dƒ. I had accumulated a sizable collection of MF Zeiss, Voigtländer and Nikkor AIS lenses over the course of two decades. The focus screen of the D700 (my first DSLR) was optimized for about ƒ/2.8 so was taken in by the hype behind the Dƒ before its release. After the reality became apparent, I sold off the D700, all the AF lenses and all but my 3 favorite AI glass for use on the ever-reliable FM2-T.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #65
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I think you mean every roll.
I get a new sensor with every exposure in any of my film cameras.
Think about it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #66
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by james.liam View Post
Spot-on, Huss.
You had your disappointment moment with Leica and the failed sensor, mine was with Nikon and the Dƒ. I had accumulated a sizable collection of MF Zeiss, Voigtländer and Nikkor AIS lenses over the course of two decades. The focus screen of the D700 (my first DSLR) was optimized for about ƒ/2.8 so was taken in by the hype behind the Dƒ before its release. After the reality became apparent, I sold off the D700, all the AF lenses and all but my 3 favorite AI glass for use on the ever-reliable FM2-T.
Yup, turn the shutter speed dial on your FM2T. It feels really solid and planted. Turn it on the DF. It feels like there is a thin metal coating over a plastic core.

Nikon hurt my feelings with this one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #67
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
 
Pál_K's Avatar
 
Pál_K is offline
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Gig Harbor
Posts: 280
Three cheers for solid metal...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMAG9738-1_1.jpg (42.2 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg IMAG9714-1_1m_1~2.jpg (12.5 KB, 3 views)
__________________
"Great photography is about the visual effect upon the viewer, not sharpness." - Stephen Gandy, Cameraquest
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #68
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
I get a new sensor with every exposure in any of my film cameras.
Think about it.
Ok, a new piece of the film strip... but not a new look. I thought you meant a new look.
  Reply With Quote

Sensor Repair
Old 01-01-2020   #69
ndnwithaleica
Registered User
 
ndnwithaleica is offline
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 1
Sensor Repair

I sent an M9M with sensor corrosion to NJ on November 30th. I had it back in my hands inside of three weeks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemermark View Post
Given sensor replacement takes 6 months or more (unless something has changed) I not sure how many people would want to pay $600 for a camera that needs a $1600 repair and then wait 6 months to get it back when they can pick up a repaired one for $2300. The logic escapes me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #70
james.liam
Registered User
 
james.liam is offline
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Nieuw Amsterdam
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndnwithaleica View Post
I sent an M9M with sensor corrosion to NJ on November 30th. I had it back in my hands inside of three weeks.
I started a thread several months ago and and with about 120 respondents, 90% had already sent in their M9/M9M in for sensor replacement. As corroded sensors out there dwindle, turnaround times have shortened.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2020   #71
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndnwithaleica View Post
I sent an M9M with sensor corrosion to NJ on November 30th. I had it back in my hands inside of three weeks.
That’s good to know for anyone looking at getting one w a bad sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2020   #72
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZivcoPhoto View Post
Wonder if that was Kodak’s misjudgment or Leica’s - after all, I thought Kodak designed and manufactured the sensor for Leica.
Good question. Your question also applies to which party was responsible for not using any IR filter for the M8.

Kodak designed and manufactured the photo-diode array and associated electronics. Kodak did not manufacture the IR filter film. I'm not sure anyone outside of Leica and Kodak actually knows who chose the original M9 IR filter layer film. The same goes for the micro-lens and the RGB Bayer arrays. I would be stunned of Leica did not play a significant role evaluating in the micro-lens and RGB Bayer array performance. These significantly affect perceived image quality.

Leica could have specified a maximum cover glass thickness and Kodak choose the least expensive solution. Or Leica could have selected the thinner cover glass after the standard cover glass thickness under performed in prototype testing. This sort of information is proprietary. Anyone who actually knows can't discuss it.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2020   #73
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
... But they forgot about the focusing screen. The same old AF screen that was in the 610 (?) which was accurate to maybe f4 manually. Using the digital rangefinder was not of much help as there was far too much play in it. The in focus dot remained lit over a wide focus range relatively speaking.
...
Exactly. I switched brands and eventually sold all my Nikon gear because the the DF did not provide adequate manual focusing methods.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 14:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.