Optical-photographer related question

[DoveVadar]

Well said, bro. :thumbsup:

Wa! CO's wisdom. Not a CO for nothing......well said!:thumbsup::angel:

Glad I made some sense :sticktong

 

[chiif]

What’s everybody's take on leica lens in terms of optical superiority really? I see lots of nice pics taken with leica and non leica lens. I am a sucker for leica gears to be frank but frankly I can't tell for sure any shots taken by a leica lens. This brings about my next point, leica glow, it always puzzles me.. I see some ‘glow’ in some pics here, I think… (Some like it while some don’t but that’s not what this discussion is abt),

My 2 questions are;

1. Knowing how experienced most of u here are, has it ever occur to u that such nice glow could have been credited to yr understanding of natural lights & not the leica lens? If so you should give a pad on own shoulder.

2. Could it be RF users were ‘forced’ to understand lights due to the RF’s designs.. which resulted a more in-depth natural-lights knowledge. (I mean SLR users also understand lights too ofcoz.. this thread is not for this argument).

Am fairly new to RF photography, just really hope to understand optical-photog relation in order to excel in this hobby (I wish…). Am just wondering if anyone else had such thoughts previously.. cause this may affect my future buying trend.. ofcoz leica will always be a leica.

PS, this is not a agruement thread for leica or non-leica, RF or SLR.
Thanks all, Happy Lunar New Year!

I think many of us have had this debate within ourselves before... whether better gears equate making better pictures. I think the answer is obvious to some but not so obvious to many. IN any case, it's better not to equate the two and best to enjoy photography as a process. Whether a photograph is good or not, it only matters to the person who is seeing it. We do not need to let the whole world judge it if we do not want to. Putting the photo on flickr doesn't mean that letting the whole world judge your photo on artistic factor or whether it's a good photo or not.

Personally, I feel, the bottom line: as long as the photographer enjoys the process, what ever the result should be acceptable. Afterall, photography to a non-professional is just a hobby. It should be fun. No one can tell him or her what to do and what not to do or whether his gear is not up to mark or not. Or whether he must clean up the few dust specks to make the photo more presentable. We don't have to subject our pictures to critic if we don't want to.

Many of us love collecting gears as a hobby and at the same time take pictures with and of them. We often discuss about the optical qualities and identity of the lenses. We also take pictures and compare the "glow" bokeh and those things that show the inherent characteristic of the lenses. Some of them may be expensive and some may just cost less than a meal at the fast food restaurant.

Unfortunately, Leica to many, is like the pinnacle of camera gears and often bidding end up sky high prices for these items. Coupled with limited production, these lenses are often more expensive than one caret diamonds.

My advise is, buy what you need. Spend what you can afford. Enjoy the process, share your photos with family & friends.... and make more new friends.

And if you want to excel in this hobby, enter competitions and take more photos. Most of the time, good photos that won at competition have no relation to whether it's taken with RF, DSLR, MF, LF or even iPhone (The Best Digital Camera in the World, in my opinion ). A good photograph has usually no relation to what is used to capture it.

Hope that helps... and hope I make sense....

 

[Hacker]

This brings about my next point, leica glow, it always puzzles me.. I see some ‘glow’ in some pics here, I think… (Some like it while some don’t but that’s not what this discussion is abt),

My 2 questions are;

1. Knowing how experienced most of u here are, has it ever occur to u that such nice glow could have been credited to yr understanding of natural lights & not the leica lens?

Leica glow is from the radioactive glass elements.

"Of course all earlier Leica lenses had radioactive elements. Hence, the legend of the "Leica Glow". There has been much debate on the effects of the radioactivity on the photograph and the photographer. According to Thatcher and Mereck circa 1951 users of Leica cameras tended to have girl children. In the same year research done by the Claymore Foundation doing a project called "Silver Dark" claimed that Leica photographs displayed an eire glow which they claimed captured more than just the image. It was thought by the researchers that the Leica Lens, due to its radioactive elements, captured a spiritual or ghostly element of the subjects photographed....perhaps adding a spiritual element to Leica Photography.

Most legends have footing in some sort of reality so it is told."

Source: http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00OnNJ


Sorry, could not resist it. :bsmilie:

 

[ZoomP]

I think many of us have had this debate within ourselves before... whether better gears equate making better pictures. I think the answer is obvious to some but not so obvious to many. IN any case, it's better not to equate the two and best to enjoy photography as a process. Whether a photograph is good or not, it only matters to the person who is seeing it. We do not need to let the whole world judge it if we do not want to. Putting the photo on flickr doesn't mean that letting the whole world judge your photo on artistic factor or whether it's a good photo or not.

Personally, I feel, the bottom line: as long as the photographer enjoys the process, what ever the result should be acceptable. Afterall, photography to a non-professional is just a hobby. It should be fun. No one can tell him or her what to do and what not to do or whether his gear is not up to mark or not. Or whether he must clean up the few dust specks to make the photo more presentable. We don't have to subject our pictures to critic if we don't want to.

Many of us love collecting gears as a hobby and at the same time take pictures with and of them. We often discuss about the optical qualities and identity of the lenses. We also take pictures and compare the "glow" bokeh and those things that show the inherent characteristic of the lenses. Some of them may be expensive and some may just cost less than a meal at the fast food restaurant.

Unfortunately, Leica to many, is like the pinnacle of camera gears and often bidding end up sky high prices for these items. Coupled with limited production, these lenses are often more expensive than one caret diamonds.

My advise is, buy what you need. Spend what you can afford. Enjoy the process, share your photos with family & friends.... and make more new friends.

And if you want to excel in this hobby, enter competitions and take more photos. Most of the time, good photos that won at competition have no relation to whether it's taken with RF, DSLR, MF, LF or even iPhone (The Best Digital Camera in the World, in my opinion ). A good photograph has usually no relation to what is used to capture it.

Hope that helps... and hope I make sense....

Bro, can I buy the VC 50 f1.1 for the price of a Big MAC meal? Haha.. jokes aside, I think you've made a great point. I, for one am quilty of spending too much time and money buying lenses and bodies. However, I've also derive a lot of enjoyment when I use them to shoot. The beauty of Leica gears is when you sell a len or body, chances are you won't lose too much and for me, I've sold quite a few nice lenses n bodies at cost.