M users only,

I used to use a tripod with SLRs (and was never satisfied with the results), but never found a use for them with the M camera. I use a table top with my SWC because it's slow speed 1:4.5. If I use 400, I found I can shoot at 1/2 sec. when a solid brace is found: pressed to glass plate; against a wall; on a church pew, etc., not purely hand held and the photos are quite sharp.

If I'm shooting interiors I use my SWC w/table top.

And with respect to flash: again, other than fill flash (ND filters), they're of no use to me. M's are not the proper tool for flash, even when it's possible. Would anyone put snow tires on a Ferrari just to be able to drive in the winter just because they could fit?

Both devices slow down and make cumbersome the M's handling.

Like so many other poster's remarks: keep your SLR, save up for the M, and use the approriate tool for the job. Just because it's possible doesn't make it right.

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 14, 2002

Answers

>Would anyone put snow tires on a Ferrari just to be able to drive in the winter just because they could fit?<

Chris, excellent point! However they might if the Ferrari is the only car they own... In fact, they might even spring for a complete extra set of wheels to change to in winter!

;) Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 14, 2002.

Jack,

I can be QUITE sure that an M-user has several differant cameras, not just several M's; I'd say for each solo M there will be 99 multiple type/format user.

I don't have a Minox (sorry Martin). But, I have an Olympus OM-1 system (28, 50, 135 for $125). Garage sale item. It's great to live in a college town (Chicago). The kids are generally spoiled, and have little feeling for value. And, when they have been "graduated", they get rid of their seldom used stuff and move to NYC waiting to be discovered. Moving on, I have a SWC, 500C/M (at home, anybody want?), Nikonos (for that Thai raft trip), CLE (keeper), and a bunch of accesories.

All of the above are more appropriate for tripod/flash use than the M. Maybe we should take a survey (in another thread).

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 14, 2002.

Personally I use bounced flash with my M6's when using neg film. (I have vivitar 283's which aren't ttl, of course). I like the effect very much and if you use rechargables you get quicker re-cycle times...but now I digress. As for other camera systems - I'm in 2 minds - I often think of getting rid of everything else to concentrate my attention on the M. In the end, all systems involve a trade off of conveniences. Using slr's for flash work means much faster safe shutter speeds and, therefore less ambient light or even the use of a dreaded tripod (my take on t/pods is that that's what waist level finders were invented for...which is why maybe I'll keep the 'blad after all...)

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), January 14, 2002.

I know several people who have even 2-3 cars, but combined, they're all less expensive than one Ferrari. Ditto re cameras and my TTL. I like using it without a tripod when I can, but when I really need a tripod (and I prefer slow speed film, e.g. Kodachrome 25, dammit) then I use a tripod, either my Manfrotto 290/Linhof (mostly for indoors) or my Leica Tablelap team (usually outdoors).

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), January 14, 2002.

Tripod - once, to do a test film on a suspected faulty lens. Flash - very rarely, when all other options are used up.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 14, 2002.

In reference to tripod use, unless you use faster films, you really do need to use a tripod. We've got these incredably sharp lenses only to be get degraded images because we refuse to use a tripod to steady the camera. It is physically impossible to hand hold a camera as still as a tripod can. ANY camera movement will degrade an image to some degree. Even with faster films and wider f-stops hand holding is still compromising the image quality to some degree. Sometimes the situation or type of shooting requires hand holding the camera and that is fine, but the bottom line is that your image simply can't then be as sharp as if it were tripod mounted. Physically impossible! Sorry if this isn't the answer you were hoping for. Of coure a slightly less sharp picture is better than no picture at all. Just when possible, get the best possible image quialty you can. ;^)

-- Ron Snyder (STUDIO1401@AOL.COM), January 14, 2002.

Chris,

I keep a Bogen table top tripod an a SF-20 flahs in my M6 camera bag.

Depending on what I'm photographing, I will also take an old Gitzo 001 tripod with a Gitzo ball head. The Gitzo is particularly useful when I'm shooting slow film and want greater depth of field for say, landscapes. I even use a cable release. More often than not, the Gitzo is left home in the closet.

I use the SF-20 flash for "point & shoot" snapshots at parties to individual or small group shots at an awards ceremony.

I don't find that the flash or tripod slow me down or are cumbersome to use. In the situations where they would slow me down or would jeopardize making the photograph, I wouldn't use them. I try to apply my limited set of tools to each situation as the requirements of the situation dictate.

-Nick

-- Nicholas Wybolt (nwybolt@earthlink.net), January 14, 2002.

I understand the strengths of the Leica M systems, and the implication of handheld, low light shooting. But I use a flash on mine regulalry when the light is low and I want to stop action/camera shake. No apology is offered for this, as it works for me. I also use a tripod from time to time when I want lots of DoF and the shutter speed gets too low to produce a sharp image otherewise. Table top tripods are OK, but I prefer my Bogen 3021 most of the time.

Now that I have a 90mm (and 35/50) , I am thinking of selling my SLR gear because I can get everything done I need with the Leica now. Hey, the M is plenty camera for me...

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), January 14, 2002.

I suppose one could decide that it would be better to take a lousy shot than to use some equipment that would help, but I completely fail to understand the logic. I took this with a diffused flash on a bracket, why would I let camera type determine what equipment I use with it?

Barbeque, Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), January 14, 2002.

If given the choice of getting no shot at all or getting one with a flash, then i use the flash. Ever shoot a street protest at night? A flash is usually required. The M is a great camera but you really shouldn't restrict yourself to these dogmas about how a Leica should be used.

-- Richard Le (rvle@yahoo.com), January 14, 2002.

I use a tripod as much of the time as I can, either a table-top or a Gitzo 026, either of which can be carried with ease. I have proved to myself that at the shutter speeds commonly associated with ISO 100 film and f/8-11 apertures I can get sharper images handheld with a Canon Rebel and 28-135 Image Stabilizer lens (about $700 total) than my M6 and $10K of lenses from 28-135. For my style of shooting, opening a lens to f/2-f/4 to get fast shutter speeds doesn't work from the standpoint of DOF. So for me to really see the advantage of the Leica glass I need to mechanically support the camera in some way.

As for flash, I suppose when the light drops I could either open the lens wide and get a few inches of DOF and totally ruin the shot I want, or else put the M6 back in the bag, fold my arms and tilt my nose up in proud loyalty to the M mythology...or I could stick on a little $50 Olympus S20 flash and get the shot I was after. I almost always to the latter.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 14, 2002.

I use my Leica table top tripod a good deal with my M and R, but very rarely my real tripod - I seem to reserve that for Hasselblad use. I use the table top tripod most as a chest pod when I can and the subject warrants. Also it is frequently braced against walls and fences and so on when the light gets low. Works superbly, and in fact there is no difference in quality compared to using a "real" tripod, the only downside is that a table top tripod cannot be placed wherever you want and you might have to hunt for the right spot to make a shot work.

So I do not hold with the idea that an M must be unencumbered. In an ideal world this might be the case, but if you use slower film then you just have to consider it or you may have to put your camera away when the light gets low.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 14, 2002.

Chris,

I own a tripod, but I haven't used it to hold a camera in 5 years. It usually ends up holding my flash off camera for portraits.

I do use a flash with my M cameras quit a bit. I find that they are well suited for use with a flash. I bought my Leica Ms for low light focusing - usually the same time that I'm using a flash (especially with slow slide film). I can also get an idea for what the flash is lighting up because there is no viewfinder blackout.

The only problem I have with my M and flash (large SB-24 or Vivitar 285) is that it is a bit unwieldy because the camera is small and I cant get as good a grip on it as I would my larger Nikons. I'm sure a grip would help this, but it isn't too bad.

I agree with using the right tool for the job (Leica Ms just aint happening for sports), but when I'm working I usually encounter all sorts of different situations (inside, outside, crappy light, etc) and to be prepared in your defintion would require me to carry both my nikons and leicas in my camera bag. That goes complety against another reason I got leicas in the first place - lighter and less to carry around.

What it comes down to is what works for you, no matter what the camera is considered "ideal" for.

cheers, john

-- john locher (locherjohn@hotmail.com), January 14, 2002.

I don't think I've ever mounted an M on a tripod. A tripod would severely interfere with the ways I usually use an M. In the situations where I'm concerned about ultimate "sharpness," I'll be using a medium or large format anyway.

I've never used an M with on-camera flash, either, though I have hooked it up to strobes in studio/location settings or to a big, "potato-masher" flash for fill on location.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), January 14, 2002.

I use a tripod when I need the support for a given picture. What camera I put on it is inconsequential. Similarly, I use a flash unit when I need fill or main lighting for a particular situation, and it makes no difference what camera I use it with other than as a technical aside. Certainly modern 35mm SLRs have the most sophisticated flash integration around and also have access to long lenses that I might need the tripod for, but I've used a tripod for particular circumstances regardless which camera I was using.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), January 14, 2002.

Pat and I have found that a monopod serves an interim purpose in cathedrals, churches, museums and certain public buildings.- - - they won't let you use a tripod, and the light is too dim for a fast shutter speed. An M6 with a 35, 24, or 21 lens can really be "steadied" with a monopod. "Tain't a tripod, but it will help get better pictures under these conditions. Just don't project the slides at too much enlargement! < big grin >

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), January 14, 2002.

I remember using a Braun Hobby flash gun on my M2 somewhere around 1963, I think it was. I also had a Honeywell potato masher. Today, If need flash, I like to use my SB-24 and 8008 combo. This has spoiled me for any other flash setup.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), January 14, 2002.

Flash bashing just gets on my nerves, as does the assumption that we're all multiple camera/lens owners. I am one of the 1% "solo" Leica owners. Only one lens too. I just bought a SF-20 because it was the only Leica accessory I could afford, and I must say - I like it. It essentially makes the camera a P&S for low light photography, which is very handy at times. I love the effect of using a slow shutter speed (1/4 sec) - very dreamy. I just got my first roll back where I used the SF-20, and every frame was properly exposed and focused, which is much better luck than I've had with this camera so far. I do a lot of indoor photography, and frankly sometimes available light is just crappy light. The SF-20 greatly increases my opportunities to use my camera - and that's all I care about.

-- Ken Geter (kgeter@yahoo.com), January 14, 2002.

I use a tripod when I have one and when the picture I want to take needs a shutter speed that is longer than I can hand hold and keep the picture as sharp as I want it.

I use a flash when it's too dark to shoot hand held and keep the picture sharp, and I don't have a tripod or the subject is moving around.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the type of camera you use. Although using rangefinder cameras on tripods is somewhat tedious in some ways.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), January 14, 2002.

I use flash quite often with my M6; I use a tripod less frequently but I do have a Leica table-top model with large ball-and-socket head in my camera bag at all times. To me, it's "horses for courses" and, if flash or tripod allows me to get a better shot, so be it. I'd rather not use either but I see no point in imposing arbitrary rules on myself just because the Leica M is well-suited to hand-held available light photography.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), January 14, 2002.

I am one of the 1% "solo" Leica owners. Only one lens too.

More power to ya Ken. Less is always more, I like to think.

I find that I've often tried to push the limits of the low light capability of the Leica. I notice that while I shot with a Hexar for a few years, I never brought it with me to dark settings expecting to shoot much. Yet with the 35/2Asph, whose aperture is not larger, I have for some reason continued to expect it to work well in much dimmer situations than I'd ever taken the Hexar to. As if I took too seriously the camera shake limit of the Hexar (which, to be sure, is user-programmable).

I have a Bogen table top which I don't use that often- maybe an extension collar would be helpful.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), January 15, 2002.

It was just my opinion and I truly looking for an excuse to learn new ways to use the flash unit and the table top tripod that are in may bag. I did fill flash at a wedding w/SWC with good results; less good w/M6 (1/50).

I guess I'm low on the learning curve wrt flash. Tripod use is quite deliberate. But I just don't take many night time landscapes or the stars rotating around the north star anymore.

I like taking photo's of people, people move, so a tripod is of little use for me.

Someone once said: A fuzzy picture of a good idea is better than a sharp picture of a fuzzy idea.

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 15, 2002.

I understand that the English language is quite complicated. Im not Shakespear, so my choice of words, I realize, can be misconstrued. But Jeez, why are some people sooo sensitive? I'm not bashing anyone/anything, just expressing and asking for OPINIONS. I like what I like and you like what you like. Many times we like the same things. Chill. If you want snapshots, save money and buy an auto- everything or go digital.

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 15, 2002.

Having just sent off my M4-2 for a flash sync problem, I'll use it if and when necessary. Hell I'll use flash on the IIIf rd if and when, but only when I reach that point which isn't often. I mostly stick the flash on the R4sp and go to town for the family snaps, works great in that respect.

I last used a tripod (for work, not tests) with an SWC for a CD cover, the image didn't make the cut and the tripod was last seen collecting dust, oh no that's right I stuck the digicam on it for some selftimer shots on the anniversary last Nov. Comes in handy now and again.

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@home.com), January 15, 2002.

III carefully reread both my "question" and the answers. My question was not a question after all; sounded more like preaching - sorry.

So, if I may clarify. I am not asking was "situation" (e.g., landscape, low-light, stop action, neg. film, more DOF, outdoors, lens testing) one uses a flash/tripod, but what "specifically" one needs these instruments (e.g. basketball games, presumably H.S, wedding, sunrise/sunset (ah-ha, found a use), etc.).

Let's say stage: Flash not allowed; people moving, tripod no use How 'bout at work: Depending what you do And street: Fill-in, but need a certain film/technique (1/50) Why not Mountains/moonlit lake (Lac Louise, Alberta); I'd use MF

More Please

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 15, 2002.

Ok, truth here: I am too lazy to use a tripod. I have a nice one. Every 5 years or so, I take it out, clean it, polish it, adjust it, promise myself I'll use it once in a while, and never do.

I love to use my small, convenient Rollie flash (126 something or other). Especially for family snaps at holidays, etc. after a couple glasses of wine or so. Converts the M6 into a focus-close-as-you-can and shoot.

-- Hil (hegomez@aol.com), January 15, 2002.

I'm sure plenty of Swiss and Val d'Aoste Ferrari owners regularly put snow tires on their beloved Ferrari.

That said, I have bought the SF20 for my M, but used it maybe on 2 rolls in the last year. Flash on M is masochist, and direct flash (as SF20 unavoidibly is) is almost always an aesthetical crime. Large flash on M (Metz 40/50MZ or other cobras) is a functional no-no for me.

Tripod with M is also "blasphematic" to my eyes. Though you sometimes have to resort to tripoded M if you do not simultaneously carry an alternative setup for specific focal lengths. I'm thinking of ultrawides such as 12/15/21, which are financially very hard to replicate in the SLR world (especially in the Leica R world) or even impossible to replicate. I use such ultrawides for portfolios document art exhibitions, and have to resort to tripod for obvious light reasons.

But it is not at all what they are designed for (regular readers know my feelings regarding the frustration of using approximative separate viewfinders). I have therefore recently swapped my 21M for a 19R to be able to carry a larger chunk of such applications with the R.

The M is designed for quick, efficient, discreet flashless handheld anylight photography. Some of us may enjoy finding ways around the limitations of this design, but that is not my case. OK, maybe the tabletop tripod in bars. That is all....;-)

-- Jacques (jacques.balthazar@hotmail.com), January 15, 2002.

Exactly Jacque,

I like to ask controversial "questions/comments":

1. Because I always wanted to know

2. I like the attention. My mother didn't give me enough attention 8>(

3. Like someone said, it's another slow day in Krasnodar, Russia

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 15, 2002.

Here's a situation I can see myself using a tripod for. Photographing in a home where people are unused to being photographed, for instance in a muslim household. Set the camera up on the tripod, maybe while your subjects are having a meal, and while chatting with them, trip the shutter whenever things look good. This way you don't lose your interaction with them and they aren't quite as intimidated by the experience. Obviously for more static situations.

This is something I've often thought of doing but somehow have never got around to. I'll have to give it a go one day. But I do hate carrying the tripod around.

I really don't get the idea that M's aren't the proper tool for a given application like flash. They have hot shoes and sync contacts, so use flash if you want to. The only thing that counts is the picture, who cares what camera you got it with, or whether you were faithful to some imaginary code of conduct?

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 15, 2002.

"Someone once said: A fuzzy picture of a good idea is better than a sharp picture of a fuzzy idea."

Maybe, but neither of them come within striking distance of a sharp picture of a good subject. Anything else is just laziness, not doing what's required to get the shot.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 15, 2002.