Has anyone written a good list of hints and tips, or even come up with some photo exercises, that would help those of us migrating from SLRs to the M6? I'm used to the Canon EOS system. Just got an M6 and am having more trouble than I thought I would adjusting. At first I thought, "piece of cake". But now, I find myself frustrated that I can't quickly focus on moving targets. I have one lens, the f/2 35 summicron asph. Guessing the hyperfocal distance isn't that easy either. Say I want the hyperfocal distance for f5.6; based on the blitz marks on the lens barrel, I have to guess that the closest distance is somewhere between 12 - 30 feet (closer to 30, but how much closer?). I'm sure some of the old hands out there might have some advice. Also it's darned hard to use the rangefinder patch when the camera is pointed towards a strong light source...it flares everything out and I can't seem to focus properly.

-- Tom Coppedge (tcoppedg@us.ibm.com), June 12, 2001

Answers

Well, to find the hyperfocal distance, you can just set the infinity mark opposite the aperture mark on the right side of the lens, corresponding to the aperture you are using. The aperture mark on the left will then give you the near focus limit. Don't forget you don't always need sharp focus to infinity, though. You are basically on the right track, using zone focusing. It probably needs to be said that the M6 not so much replaces your EOS, as augments it. Horses for courses.

The rangefinder whiteout is a genuine nuisance. It's peculiar to the M6. My M2 doesn't have this problem. In fact, no other M has it that I know of. Certainly not the M3. We do have a thread on this, with one fellow claiming he has a $10 cure for the whiteout problem. Sometimes it's enough to make me want an M5 instead. But not often.

Best Wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), June 12, 2001.

Tom:

Welcome to the wonderfullll world of Leica M photography! You've just stepped back 25 or so years in photo technology, and hi-lited 3 of about 23 issues you are going to face in your transition from your auto-everything SLR to the Leica M. My first suggestion is to thoroughly review all of the archived "M" posts on this site -- a lot of reading, but many of your questions will be answered, and you'll learn a few good tricks at the same time. Second, allow yourself at least 20 rolls (36 exposure rolls!) through the camera before you even think about giving up -- your patience should reward you with a higher level of quality photographic output than you've done in the past. Third, practice, practice, practice and practice, and then practice some more. When I first got my M, one of the things I did to gain focusing and metering proficiency was simply sitting in my favorite chair and focusing, metering and dry-firing (no film) on different objects in my family room. Also, to make matters all the more challenging, the meter in the M is pretty much just a "wide" spot meter, so you might want to revisit basic metering technique, especially if you're going to shoot 'chromes. Give it enough time, though, and you'll develop a Zen-like relationship with your M... Hey, maybe I should write a book - "Zen and the art of Leica M photography" ;-)

Cheers and Welcome!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), June 13, 2001.

On the focus issue it a matter of practice. Your lens has a focusing tab so you need to practice picking out subjects, estimating their distance and set the focus tab without looking at the camera. When you lift the camera to your eye see how far you are off and then try it again and again and again. Soon you will be able to set your focus very accurately before the camera hits your eye.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), June 13, 2001.

Read as many of the threads here as you can (!) and also peruse Andrew Nemeth's Leica FAQ.

http://www.nemeng.com/leica/index.shtml

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), June 13, 2001.

Streuth! Those answers are damn well told. Good basics for the lot of us.

-- Paul Nelson (clrfarm@comswest.net.au), June 13, 2001.

Tom,

Are you migrating from SLRs to the M6, or using both.

My advice is to not use both systems together for 6 months.

Better, use only your M6 for 6 month.

Lucien

-- Lucien (lucien_vd@yahoo.fr), June 13, 2001.

Dear Sir:

Herewith I order three (3) copies of J. B. Flesher's forthcoming book entitled "Zen and the art of Leica M photography". (One copy is for the office, one is for at home -- but please get this work published soon -- I need the third copy in four weeks when I leave on vacation.)

Yours truly

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), June 13, 2001.

Thanks for the (very quick) replies, guys. Keep'em coming.

-- Tom Coppedge (tcoppedg@us.ibm.com), June 13, 2001.

Tom,

I understand completely. I too am a recent convert from the SLR world. I can only tell you after 8-months I'm still learning the idiosyncracies of the M camera. I've made every bone head mistake a person can, e.g., loaded film wrong, didn't set the ASA right, metered incorrectly. You name it and I've done it. However, when I do everything right, it's magic! These have been some of the best images I've made in my 27-years plus. I feel much more involved in my photography then I ever did as the "operator" behind the SLR.

I know I didn't provide a list of helpful tips and techniques, much has been written and a review of the archives, as suggested, will help enormously. Good luck and hang in there.

Regards,

Jim

-- lexx-1 (james.kuhn-1@kmail.ksc.nasa.gov), June 13, 2001.

I've been shooting Leicas side by side with Nikons since 1968, and I've never been comfortable with an AF SLR, so I guess it's a little difficult to relate to the question that way. The big shooting difference between a rangefinder and an SLR has to do with how much previsualization you do. RFs don't show you what the lens is seeing the way an SLR does, the viewfinder and focusing device are simply targeting mechanisms. You have to develop a feel for what the lens sees.

I would guess the most important thing to do is to slow down, at least while you're getting comfortable. Spend more time just looking through the viewfinder and learn how to visualize the coverage of the 35mm lens. When you look at a scene, learn to identify what your focus point is even without the camera at your eye .. that way, you know exactly where to look with the center of the frame when you pick up the camera.

Don't think of just "hyperfocal" distance, think of focus zones ... "where is the focus point, how much in front and behind that point do I want in a sharp zone?" Don't think in terms of exact numbers ... think "deep" (small aperture) or "shallow" (large aperture).

With a little practice, you can achieve the kind of precision in your RF shooting that you once might have believed only an SLR could provide. With more practice beyond that, you can do it very quickly. The ability to previsualize and see photos takes time, but is extremely valuable to all photography regardless of camera type. It's just more important to develop it when using an RF camera.

The M6' rangefinder flare is a pain. I have both M6TTL and M4-P bodies, and the M4-P is much nicer in flarey conditions. Judiciously positioning your eye behind the center of the focusing patch can eliminate it, but it gets awfully fussy. I've found a good reduction of the flare can be had by simply putting a small piece of tape on the illuminator window, just enough to cover the center of it without occluding the illumination for the framelines. It works well enough that I'm considering painting the small patch on instead,

Slow down, think, previsualize, practice. Speed will come with practice.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), June 13, 2001.

Despite all that's been said, it is possible that it just isn't for you. The autofocus SLR is a terrific tool and may simply suit you better. My advice would be to get into a situation where you're _not_ thinking about the camera, shoot fast and furious, five rolls a day for two weeks, review every day's films the next day. At the end of that you'll know.

You may find it useful to make it harder for yourself by shooting only slide for a while. That way the exposure problems will be far more evident and you'll have to really work out how to overcome them.

If it doesn't become as natural as swallowing after a couple of weeks or month of intensive use, then it most likely never will. No blame attaches.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), June 13, 2001.

I've never thought from the perspective of someone who always has used auto-everything cameras. For me, all the buttons and displays and custom functions and exposure and metering modes are much more daunting than getting used to loading, focusing and metering with a Leica. And unless you consistently use the DOF preview with every shot with an SLR, you still have to guess what it's going to be, plus most of the composition needs guesswork too because it's out of focus at maximum aperture!

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), June 13, 2001.

>shoot fast and furious> I liked that rob

Tom; after a wile all the experience you can get from this practices transform into the art of knowing the lens you´re using, the camera as you see is a basic tool, all you need is to love photography. The best of luck with your new camera.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), June 13, 2001.

Here is a great game to play.

Set the camera at f8/250 or whatever, loaded with Tri-X, and focussed to 10 feet. Then walk around and take pictures of stuff exactly 10 feet away.

I find that most interesting pictures involve stuff that is 10 feet away.

Play around with other distances.

Soon, you'll be able to get close to perfect focus on the subject just by guessing, so touching up focus in the viewfiner doesn't take long.

Modern SLR cameras encourage a mode of use where you focus and check exposure on *every* shot. I think Leicas and manual cameras encourage a mode where you set the camera once for several shots in a row, and only adjust as needed. This can be hard to get used to, but once you do get into this mode, it makes using the manual camera easier.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), June 13, 2001.

Hi Tom-

I agree with everyone else that hyperfocal distance and zone focussing are the place to start. Since you get good DOF with your 35, the blitz marks are pretty far apart...it's hard to figure accurately your actual distance. I use a 50 summicron and ike you, I wanted more accurate info than can be had from the lens barrel. I made cards numbered from 5 to 40 and set these one foot apart along a fence. I focussed on 5' and shot at 5.6, 8, 11 and 16 (figuring that anything under 5.6 the DOF is shallow enough to demand more critial focus than zone focussing gives)Then I did the same thing for 7' and 10'. I took the film to a 1-hour lab (I normally shoot HP5+, but for this I used Kodak's 400CN)I just looked at the prints to deterine what was acceptably sharp to my eye. I used this info and made up a small laminated card that has the zones of focus for each f-stop/distance combo.

Of course it's better to memorize the settings. Also the exercise of estimating distance and presetting focus is fast once you get the hang of it. With practice you should be able to pick 2 or 3 distances and focus with the tab on your lens without everlooking down. This method combined with the DOF of your 35 should get you very good results.

Also, memorize the metering field. I think you'll find it remarkably accurate. As for lens flare, it doesn't really bother me, except that in a $2000 camera, I might expect it to not flare...

Isn't it interesting that we spend that kind of money on a camera with a sophisticated rangefinder only to learn how to estimate distance?

Good Luck

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), June 13, 2001.

As for lens flare, it doesn't really bother me, except that in a $2000 camera, I might expect it to not flare...

I believe the discussion of flare was limited to the flare in the rangefinder focusing optics, not lens flare.

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), June 14, 2001.

---

Ok, so far, the primary suggestions are: 1. Practice Practice Practice (although I don't have quite enough time to shoot as many rolls as Robert suggests, unfortunately!) 2. Shoot slide film to get the most 'honest' feedback 3. Play various focusing games to get better at guessing distance 4. Think about focus zones when shooting, not specific distances 5. Resist picking up an SLR for several months

These are great suggestions, and I'll take them to heart. What a supportive crew!

Question about film: I'm using Provia F currently (so I'm already doing recommendation #2 above). I'd also like to practice with B&W. So, would Agfa Scala be good to practice with or should I stick with B&W print film. I do not do my own processing.

-- Tom Coppedge (tcoppedg@us.ibm.com), June 14, 2001.

---

Oh, I forgot about the rangefinder flare fix suggestions - thanks. Really amazing that on a $2K camera, I have to solve what seems to be a pretty common problem by sticking a piece of tape over the rangefinder illumination window. Or buy Lutz Konermann's shade thing.

-- Tom Coppedge (tcoppedg@us.ibm.com), June 14, 2001.

---

Tom, ironic, isn't it?

Though the suggestions together make the Leica seem hopelessly neanderthal and inadequate, the practice really does pay off. After a few months and a few dozen rolls (the quick overnight or same day turnaround on slides in crucial), you will find your success rate (exposure, focus, composition, moment) is as good or better than any modern camera.

I think this is more a testament to the capacity of the human brain to adapt and compensate more than the Leica though it really gets in the way less than a lot of other similar age and newer cameras, once you master the (relatively small) quirks.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), June 14, 2001.

---

Tom:

I for one believe in giving yourself some opportunities for success in the early stages, lest you get too discouraged early on. So, I would start with print film -- at least a few rolls worth before going to 'chromes, UNLESS you are already proficient in the use of a hand-held spot meter. This will allow you to get a pretty good idea of what the M can produce. As for metering with the M, I locate an object in the same light as my subject that is of neutral-gray value, and set the meter to it. If you do not follow this type of regimine, the exposures on 'chromes shot with your M will be all over the place, with a tendancy towards under-exposure. (If what I just said does not make sense to you, get a good book on basic exposure technique. In Ansel Adams' book "The Negative", chapter 3 gives a very good overview on basic exposure technique; chapter 4 deals with the zone system, and gets more advanced.)

As for film, IMO Provia F rated at 100 is just about the best transparancy film there is. For prints I like the new Portas, NC and VC in the 160 and 400 speeds. VC is a bit more contrasty and saturated than NC, but both versions and both speeds offer exceptional skin tones. I also like the new chromogenic Porta for quick and easy B&W's, and it prints well on color paper from the one- hour lab. I use Delta 400 Pro for more serious B&W work. Interestingly, I find all of the above films expose properly at their suggested ISO values. (I still use Velvia occasionally too, but rate it at 40.) Scala is neat, but a pain to get processed. Glad the earlier tip is working out!

Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), June 14, 2001.

---

Jack, thanks. I've used my pentax spot meter quite a bit (I also have a speed graphic, and have learned loads from Adam's zone system, as well as the entire "negative", "print", and "camera" book series). Since I just got the M6, I thought I'd try out the in-camera meter first just to see where things stand. Probably wouldn't hurt to compare the in-camera meter's reading to the spot's, given the same general scene, though I realize the M6's meter covers a much larger scene. I've had great success with Delta 100. Haven't tried 400, though I'm quickly learning that to get good handheld results, I'll need faster film for decent DOF. I have 3 rolls of Scala waiting to be shot, and you're right, it will be a pain to process them. Maybe for more immediate feedback I'll shoot B&W print film and follow up with Scala just to compare. Thanks again.

-- Tom Coppedge (tcoppedg@us.ibm.com), June 15, 2001.

---

Tom:

Just to clarify, I meant to suggest that you use the same *techniques* as you would with a hand-held spot meter and apply those techniques to use with the M6's onboard meter. I for one, find the M6 meter very accurate when used that way. (Very much like "zoning" with my LF camera and spot meter, but with no corrections needed for extension and filter factors.)

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), June 15, 2001.

---

Pete Su; you´re sugesting an interesting excersice for any one interested in fast reaction candid photography; it reminds me of some technikes used by Koudelka, altough I don´t see things by distance but in other terms, it can be a very interesting excersice.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), June 15, 2001.

---

Moderation questions? read the FAQ