I keep reading where Leica M users are able to take great shots at 1/15 sec or less while ordinary (whatever that means) camera users are stuck with the old reciprocal rule, i.e. 50mm = 1/60 sec at least and so on. I'm puzzled. I don't understand how the quality of the lens translates into clearer shots at lower shutter speeds. To me, whether you're using the $2000 Megalux or the $20 Schlockticron, shutter speed is shutter speed and body movement is body movement. Please explain.

-- Dan Roe (roedj@juno.com), August 08, 2001

Answers

A vital difference in being able to handhold a Leica M at slow shutter speeds is its lack of a mirror flopping up and down with each exposure, shaking things up and causing vibration. The Leica is also relatively dense, and its mass helps to lessen camera movement.

This was shot at 1/25 second handheld (about f2.8):

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), August 08, 2001.

Oh yeah, it also helps to drink heavily. The trick is to drink enough that your hands steady but not quite enough to blur your vision.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), August 09, 2001.

Another advantage of the lack of a mirror in any rangefinder camera (not just Leicas) is that your view of your subject is not temporarily obscured @ the moment of exposure, so you can confirm that you're holding the camera steady.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), August 09, 2001.

The lack of a moving reflex mirror and the relatively massive RF body are two elements which allow for steadiness at slow shutter speeds. Another thing is the very low vibration of the focal plane shutter itself: it's fairly soft springing and self- damping rubberized cloth curtains generate very little vibration moment, plus the soft, smooth release helps a lot too.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), August 09, 2001.

Also, keep in mind that the aperture blades are always stopped down to the working aperture in any rangefinder camera. SLR's, on the other hand, you'd be viewing a scene on full aperture, and when the shutter trips, the movement of blades as they stop down to the working aperture contributes to in-camera vibration. Leica M's don't have this added factor, in addition to having a rubberized cloth shutter and no reflex mirror.

-- Badris (badris@mac.com), August 09, 2001.

Nice shots Mike. I'm shooting a boxing club at the moment, low light, fast moving subject matter, f2 to f4 at best, and an 8th to 30th hand held. 35mm asph. Pre focus, guess work, praying, all of the above, I've tried it all. Whatever it takes I guess. When something works I'll post it... which leads me to....

....Mike, how are you submitting your shots to this forum? Is there someplace to submit work for feedback?

Wayne

-- Wayne Haag (wayne@wetafx.co.nz), August 09, 2001.

Well, I reckon on my CL I have a stop over what I can accomplish with the R6.2, but on the other hand if I use my Leica table tripod with my R6.2 as a chest pod, I can achieve easily what I can achieve using the CL, in fact, it may even be better. But, of course, you are more conspicuous with this arrangement. It is more difficult to use the chest-pod approach with an M as they have an assymetrically arranged tripod socket. I think that, although the mirror issue is there, M- users do somewhat exaggerate this aspect - the mirror on the R8 and the R6.2 are really pretty well damped. To me, the more significant issue with this kind of photography is the fact that an M is much quieter and the lack of blackout is nice. You get an advantage, but one can make too much of it.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), August 09, 2001.

Mike, you've posted a lot of snaps to this forum over the last few months I've been coming here, and I have to say this one really hits the spot. Very nice.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), August 09, 2001.

I am new to Leica M, but have used it exclusively for 3-4 weeks. Just the other day I picked up my Nikon FE, and I was shocked by the vibration I feelt in my hands when the mirror slapped! It got to have som effect on handheld photography.

-- Niels H. S. Nielsen (nhsn@ruc.dk), August 09, 2001.

Mike, that is First Class! Many thanks indeed for the regular treats :-)

Cartier-Bresson let it be known that he avoided coffee and smoking and did arm exercises, in addition to calisthenics, to gain steady hands. Results not withstanding there might be a little bit of sweeping exaggeration in the old master's claim.

Me, I get totally sharp results beginning at 1/250. But 1/30 is almost consistently acceptable. Found the same to be true with my Nikon FM, though I must say that with that camera, I always was hyper careful about steadying up before the shot, but my Leica M6 1/30 shots are on the fly... Maybe it was the CLANGGG!!! that the FM used to go off with, that made me cautious before pressing the shutter. The Leica seems more stable in use.

And weight does matter. I now have an old Plaubel Makina 670, about the weight of an F5, about twice that of an M body and small lens, and the image in the viewfinder is noticeably steadier than the Leica.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@Pacific.net.sg), August 09, 2001.

I have shots that I have taken at 1/8 second that have a nice quality, sure they are not critically sharp and anybody who moves in the image is blurred but without close investigation you would not comment about camera shake. To get an impresion of the vibration that you get from an M use the B setting and squeeze slowly....The opening is the only vibration that matters, the closing clunk is obviously post exposure.

I rarley get anything useful at 1/4 and by 1/30 you are almost completely safe.

Richard

-- Richard (richard@designblue.co.uk), August 09, 2001.

IMHO the shape of the M camera body helps as well: modern SLRs with these huge grips appear to comfortably fill the hand, preventing the need to cramp the fingers around that thin metal piece hardly thicker than a film cartridge--well, it's true only as long as the camera isn't at eye level. Keeping the right elbow in touch with the torso bends the right wrist at a large angle unless the camera body is thin. The Nikon FM, the Leica R6.2, and of course the M, are more comfortable to hold than a Canon EOS or Nikon F80.

Avoiding coffee? That must be a cultural thing. I need at least two cups of espresso to be steady.

And congratulations, Mike, on your shots. Especially the one in this thread!

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), August 09, 2001.

It also helps that Leica M users *believe* they can hand hold down to 1/4, so at 1/15, its a piece of cake ;^)

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), August 09, 2001.

My new love is the Visoflex III. Massive inertia, in just the right location. Now if I can find some decently fast lenses for it, in addition to the 90 Summicron. . .

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), August 09, 2001.

Dan,

The vibration free camera is the main criteria of any camera to me. A vibration delays all advantages of any best lens. That’s why I had had so much cameras. I never use a tripod, except when shooting in a studio. Because of vibration issue I have rejected many cameras, some of them are Leica R4, R6, CL, all modifications of Nikons FM, FE, FA, Hassy 2000FC, 501, 503, ELX, Rollei-SLRs, 'even OM-1, OM-2 because of aperture brining mechanism giving a vibration.

So, I can confirm that RF & TLR & view-cameras in all formats are the best choice when shooting without a tripod.

From a classic SLR’ cameras as a genuine dinosaur, who I am, I choose in 35mm format: Nikon F, F2, F3 (mirror lock up mechanism), in MF: Hasselblad 500 CM, 500 ELM because of very low level of vibration, that allows me shooting at 1/8 hand held .

Of course all M & SM Leicas are out of competition.

To Mike: thanks for the picture.

Victor

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), August 09, 2001.

I can definitely get 2 stops more out of a Leica, but 3 stops from a Rolleiflex or a Fuji rangefinder which have leaf-shutters.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), August 09, 2001.

Having got used to the "KA-CHUNK" recoil of my Nikons, I was greatly surprised by the tiny *click* of the Leica M. It sure makes me feel more confident in taking pictures with lower shutter speed settings. I have successfully shot with 1/2 sec--it was done with arms and one leg tighty wrapping around a lamppost for support (while people were looking at me wondering why I was getting intimate with a lamppost). By the way, Mike, that's a great picture--the composition is so near perfect that it looks as if you have carefully staged it!

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), August 09, 2001.

do you belive diphragm position may have something to do; with my SA 21/3.4 I feel more secure to exposure movement than with a 21/2.8 with a diphragm further behind, in my imagination it feels logic; what do you think?

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), August 09, 2001.

The only twitching I experianced was when I saw my Amex statement after purchasing a M6TTL .72 w/ a 35mm 'lux and 90 elmarit. If anyone is interested I will let you know how my SLR to RF transition progresses.

-- brooks (bvonarx@home.com), August 09, 2001.

Age has a lot to do with it (just wait, your time will come). When I was young I could routinely hold my IIIf still at 1/10 second. When I turned 50 I suddenly realized that 10% of my Kodachromes 25s weren't critically sharp. NOw, if it's below 1/125 I either use a tripod or make many exposures, hoping that one will be steady. I don't find Leicas any better than my SLRs (except the Super D Graflex).

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), August 09, 2001.

Bill, maybe attitude has a bit to do with it as well. At 45 yrs old (a couple of years back), I too found that my slow speed shots were often turning out unsharp. At first though it was my eyes, had them checked, and when okayed tried pulling out my tripod for anything less than 1/125 of a sec and suddenly all my shots were crisp. But instead of relying on the tripod I thought that maybe I had just become a bit sloppy, after all I had been photographing 25 years and had come to expect my images to be good (esthetically as well as technically). So I started to 'reforce' myself to slow down, breathe properly and 'squeeze' the release (I realized that often I stabbed at it to get the shot). After a bit of 'repractice' I find I can routinely shoot at 1/15 sec again. Just a thought.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), August 10, 2001.

The Abrahamsson Soft Release is supposed to help obtain less blurry photos with slow shutter speeds. I haven't really test this, but I like the Soft Release. It just feels better and more comfortable on my Leica.

-- Tristan (tristan@tristantom.com), August 10, 2001.

One of the most interesting features of using the swing-lens panoramic cameras like Widelux, Horizon, Noblex, etc., is that the combination of the moderate wideangle lens and and scanning slit shutter makes it possible to hand-hold successfully at 1/15 or longer, yet the actual scan exposure at that setting takes several seconds. Each part of the film gets an effective 1/15 during that scan. I'm always sure I've moved the camera during the exposure, yet the final result is a sharp negative. The fact that horizontal lines are probably not kept straight over the course of a long exposure is obscured by the inherent distortion of the swing-lens method.

-- Tim Nelson (timothy.nelson@yale.edu), August 10, 2001.

I think Mani is right about heavier cameras having less movement. I think the weight of a motor drive helps. It lowers the center of gravity, for one thing. For those who don't need one, how about a nicely finished block of heavy wood, like cocobolo or something, shaped like a motor drive? Maybe I'll work one up in the basement and post the results. It could even have a front grip on it.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), August 11, 2001.

I`ve found the same problem with my shots as Bill did. I bought my first Leica (second hand M4)in the beginning of 70s. Those days I used to take photos everywhere using Kodachrome II. I wasen`t worried about camera shaking - and still I got some quite nice results. Now, everyone knows that using Kodachrome II generally means slow shutter speeds and/or f:2. Today I`m mainly using Provia 100 F with Leica M6 TTL and if I really like to enjoy the quality of the latest Summicrons, I have to use monopod. Which, by the way, is today one of my most important photo accessory.

-- Esa Kivivuori (esa.a.kivivuori@welho.com), August 11, 2001.

What all this says is it all depends on what is acceptable to you. For small prints 1/15 may work fine, but for razor sharpness at large slide enlargments or for 16 x 20+ prints it won't be, even if taken with an M. It might still "work", but it will not be critically sharp. Of course, it depends what lenses you are using too (wideangles you can hand hold at slower speeds). As I said above, there does seem to be an M users belief that they can handhold at superhumanly slow speeds and still get "really" sharp shots. I still think this is greatly exaggerated!

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), August 13, 2001.

Robin, I think you're quite right. I've seen people claiming sharp handheld exposures at 1/2 or even 1 second, which is patently absurd unless you're dead and the camera just happens to go off in your cold stiff hands.

I think 1/15 is a reasonable expectation, but then the last time I made a 16x20 print was about 17 years ago, so what do i know...

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

This past weekend, I ended up needing to take a shot at 1/15 at f2 with my 50/2 DR for a personal project I just completed. Took two shots to "make sure". One shot (the first one) ended up with a reasonable sharpness. As in, in the 4x6 print form you could not pick it out from a line up as being shot at that slow of a speed. The other shot was obviously blurred. I'm actually quite pleased with the results. Would probably not have been able to do it with an SLR.

-- Eric Platt (ericplatt@aol.com), August 13, 2001.

If I am shooting at 1/15th or 1/30th I try and take several frames if the composition isnt changing too fast. By taking several frames you have an excellent chance of getting one that is sharp enough. So your hit ratio goes down but you get unique pictures that you wouldnt otherwise...
What this means is that I will start developing 4 rolls at once instead of just 2.

-- Russell Brooks (russell@ebrooks.org), August 14, 2001.