« Open Mike: Vinyl Nostalgia | Main | C.S. Fly »

Tuesday, 02 November 2010

Comments

:))) how many of these talks i have heard :)))

Funny stuff. I guess I should be happy I only caught 2/3s of the references.

Hilarious. A priceless window onto our group mind. Thanks Mike.

(Winces. Picks buckshot out of backside...)

can't...stop...laughing...must...breathe...

Being a social outcast as proud owner of a Trip 35 and a Fed, at least I am not at risk of getting mugged.

Does this text to movie stuff allow a "shoot him" command.

The first rule of rangefinders is that we do not talk about rangefinders.

I'm ashamed to say I understood every word of that.

for something completely different - what about your darkroom? no progress worth while reporting? or is it finished, and only i did not notice?
(just for the record, no, i do not want to buy another RF, i have got already 5)

I want to USE a rangefinder http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7508627/

and

Join the Leica user forum or not?
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7531337/

Very good. I particularly like the computer speech stutter rendering one word into "range-finder". But aren't those rules onerous? Being a contrarian by nature, I tempted to buy a Leica M5 (body only) to use for pinhole photographs onto something other than Tri-X. Tempted, but not rich enough to do the deed.

Didn't realise just how much of a rebel I've been. No wonder my photographic efforts remain amateur...

ROTFL!!!

LOL

So true... and so sad :-D

Strange though how they overlooked a crucial point: shutter noise! (or 'shudder noise' depending on the make and model)

Still, "I wanted to buy a rangefinder", and now I'm stuck with a Leica M6 and Summicron 50... and about to send them in for repairs and CLA :-D

sigh...

There are implicit rules and that is true. It is not that fun when you face these people.

Last year, I went to a shop to get my large format lens CLA and one of the customers was really angry at me. I said really angry. "Why you use that lens on your Leica?" That is before M9 and my M8 is only two digital rangefinder one can use. I guess it would be alright if I use the lowly Epson RD1 with non-Leica lens, but definitely NOT M8. He really tried to lecture me on why I should not use CV lens on my Leica.

I still do not get it today why he thought that he can lecture me. Luckily I have sold my M8 now (essentially getting a Hasselblad 203fe) and hence lessons on the Leica front would not come again. I think it is ok to use my lowly Bessa R3&R4 with my vintage Leica lens now.

Well, that is not just Leica people has strong opinion. I faced a forum guy questioned me and said why one should/could not use C lens on 203fe ... I took 110 rolls this summer and I do not see any problem, including using focal plan shutter.

You really have to ignore people and their rules I think.


I have abandoned all hope!

Now who did I lend my OM to?

Andrew

As an ex M2/4 owner and retailer of all things Leica and collectable I find this a hoot. My hat is off to the guys concerned.

Unfortunately, my M6 spent only 3 months in CLA mode. 1/2 the 'recommended' time. Guess I should send it back to for 3 more months. (and they say you need a backup when shooting digital!)

Sum-mee-lux

Neurotic!!
On a side note, what's the opinion here about why M4/3 Panasonics don't have in-body stabilization? Just so they limit the use of third party lenses? The GH2 looks awesome, but this is kind of a deal breaker.
Too many great shots lost to minimal vibration with my GF1.

No! It is not acceptable to use cheap glass on your Leica!

"Too many great shots lost to minimal vibration with my GF1."

Yeah, me too. (Another sigh.) Maybe it's my age, or just me, but this is a feature I really get a lot out of. The other night I tried again and again to handhold a shot of the house with the Halloween decorations, and each time there was just a little motion blur. I was at about 1/20th. I just couldn't do it. Kept trying...but just couldn't do it. So I could either jack the ISO to where the camera isn't comfortable, or suffer just a bit of motion blur. Or go get the tripod out of the closet.

I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that.

Mike

It is hilarious! Thanks Mike

Can I have those 4.5 minutes of my life back?

Thanks Mike!

Now I remember why I left my local photography club after a week. It really was that bad!

Can't wait for the Fuji X100!

What is especially funny is that this isn't yet referenced on the RFF forum and they are still talking about the same gearhead topics ad nauseum.

Mike, stabilization is great even if you have an excellent grip. I just find myself trying (and failing) to get images I remember I could with a stabilized body. For example, small apertures and long lenses in daylight for landscape DOF, that was a scenario where stabilization took a lot of stress off. You knew if you wanted a big print the IS would take care of the usual micro vibrations, you just knew you were OK, not anymore. I think I'll second your motion of not buying another camera without in body IS.
It's saddening, because the high ISO image quality seems to be improving fastly for most brands, so I believe Micro Four Thirds will make more sense than ever, size is a definite plus and you get accurate Av mettering with manual lenses. I was dreaming of using the gh2 with the 20/1.7, but this certainly is a big issue.

[[Or go get the tripod out of the closet.]]

My solution is to not keep the tripod /in/ a closet to begin with. Sure, it probably bothers my wife a bit, but having it sitting around the house makes for easy access and zero excuses for not using it!

Thank goodness I can blame old age and a bum prostate for what happend when I watched that video.

Very, very funny. I, too, am ashamed that I understood it all. A life wasted! But then I have a Zorki.

I stopped watching when the brown one mentioned Ken Rockwell....


[I saw the iPhone 4 version of this a little while ago. Somehow, it was much more amusing. Maybe because it came first, or maybe because this one hits too close to home.]

"I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that."

For the same reason, I rarely use my great 35mm f/1,4 on my DsMkII...Difficult to be sharp,handheld under 1/60sec...Maybe age, like you said...

I love it. Of course, shoot a QL17, which is not acceptable and so far down the list it's not even mentioned. :D

The medium format one is great as well (caution, some swearing )
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7318135/

Michael,

A shot of Bushmill is the poor man's IS.

The guy's problem was that he asked for advice. He should have just gone and bought a rangefinder, he'd be taking pictures by now.

So so true!! I´m sure most these rules/myths are basic insecurity on the photographers part. There has been nothing more liberating in my photography than not giving a SH*T and shedding all worries on what may be right or wrong in certain photography circles/forums/friends/schools. Funny enough I´m sure your "A year with a Leica" should provide a sufficient emancipating experience to be able to realise all cameras are just tools.
Paul

If you've ever wondered why more people don't use rangefinders, here's your answer: There are just too damned many "rules."

I laughed so hard I nearly dropped my M2!

Barrel, fish, shooting.

I'm with Ms. Parker.

(Me no Leica.)

Yeah, one more reason why I still love my Nikon FM2:
http://plotphoto.com/cameras/nikon-fm2.jpg.php

Somewhere on the internet is a forum discussion exactly like this. Heck, it was probably used as the script.

"Maybe it's my age, or just me, but this is a feature I really get a lot out of. The other night I tried again and again to handhold a shot of the house with the Halloween decorations, and each time there was just a little motion blur. I was at about 1/20th."

C'mon, Mike, you know the rule... With your Panasonic 20mm lens you need 1/40th. Sheessh!

:)

Say, where do I click to see the brown guy's handle? He seems to know a thing or two. Anyone?

Frank, I did see this a few weeks ago on RFF. Unfortunately, I got all the references having been on RFF for years.

The "I want to buy a camera" the guy did was also hilarious.

Somewhere on the internet is a forum discussion exactly like this. Heck, it was probably used as the script. - Craig Lee


Oh no, there are lots. Pay a visit to RFF (which is quite a nice place really) and you'll find a few on any day of the week.

Mike, thanks this made me laugh - and I'm one who missed the first 10 rff postings...

I've only just acquired a Leica, as a digital foil to my Ikon, and intend using my 'stepping stone' ZM, cheap CV and old M-Rokkor lenses on it:) None will be 'upgraded'. I think the Leica for a year wuold help to convince us that all cameras are just tools - certainly I am as able to take bad pictures with every camera I've ever used.

Mike


Alas, when I was 16 and I had a Detrola 400 rangefinder, I lusted after the pre-Spotmatic Pentax SLRs in the camera store at the mall. Now, ten Pentax SLRs later I'm lusting after that Fuji X100 and wishing I still had the old Detrola. Funny, I've never lusted after a Leica.

http://www.cameraquest.com/detrola.htm

Pretty funny, and a bit of truth now and then. But I am just waiting for a digital equivalent of my travel camera, a CL. Although I would love to have an M9, for my uses right now I cannot justify the expense even though the results from my Leica Ms were so superior to my Nikons. The differences were subtle and my customers don't reward subtle.
And for some odd reasons (not mainstream), reflex viewing suits what I am doing right now. And to my eye the viewfinder of my D700 really does work quite nicely. I did have to give up on the half-frame cameras. Just a thousand dollars wasted there.

Makes me love my Bessa more! Go CV!

Boy, I'm afraid I understood far, far too much of that. I don't remember anything except a couple of modern people referred to by initials that weren't obvious. Ouch.

Black chrome is not acceptable. It is an inferior finish that but inadequately conceals the ugly gray-colored zinc alloy hiding underneath.
Well-born rangefinders use black paint, with the concomitant appearance of a noble, brass patina with age.

Thanks for reminding my why I decided to take all the time I used to read RFF and use it for actually shooting photos instead.

I was at about 1/20th. I just couldn't do it. Kept trying...but just couldn't do it....I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that.

Embrace the jitter (eg some of Antonin Kratochvil's recent work) or embrace the mono/tri pod.

I have the G1 and the 14-45 kit lens and I do like the in-lens stabilization. If Olympus were to come out with a competitive competitor to the G-series with in-body stabilization I would certainly consider it, but it is not on the top of my list.

Like Al (Hi, Al!) I got every reference, and have even met one or two of those mentioned in person. Great fun!

-Earl, shooting Olympus 35SP :)

Hi Mike,

Must be your age ;)
I shot this picture with GF1 and 20/1.7 at 1/15 or 1/8.. I can't remember. The EXIF info is suppressed by LR, I have to look at the RAW file at home.

I find it more convenient to handhold at low shutter speed with small cameras. I couldn't do it with my Nikon DSLR even at 1/30s.

I don't want, and wouldn't have, a rangefinder.

Is this acceptable?

"I don't want, and wouldn't have, a rangefinder. Is this acceptable?"

Clearly not to the little people in the animation!

Mike

"There are rules..."

Well, considering how many of them I have violated, should I turn in my Leica now, and accept my permanent banishment from The Cult?

I literally had tears running down my face as I laughed.

The comments to this entry are closed.