In response to other recent threads, here's more about this issue of fast focusing an M camera........

Alright you flamers,

I've said in another thread about using a wider lens and zone focusing to capture fast-action with an M camera.

Goto my perpetually unfinished website, tomnutterphotos.com and click on "people."

There you will see two photos I shot just yesterday with an M6, no motor, and a 50mm Summicron.

The exposure was: F/4-and-a-half at 1/60th sec. with Fuji Press 200 speed print film. At this aperture, I was focused at about 12-feet, giviving me a depth of field of approximately four to five-feet. My vantage point was from courtside, just aside from the basket.

I shot one roll during the course of a game half and got several usable shots, of which, here are two. I know they aren't award winners, but the issue at hand here is fast focus with a rangefinder. I hope these are proof that the basic principals are the same with any camera, even a rangefinder. The issue with this camera, at least with strobes, such as were used here, is the slow sync speed, which causes ghosting in a scene with bright ambient light. If you look closely, there is some ghosting in these two pics.

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 28, 2002

Answers

Nice shots. The choice of ISO 200 for this kind of work is interesting. On my M4-P, 1/50 sec (the red arrow) is supposed to be the max speed for sync, but you use 1/60 and it worked well. At f/4 1/2, you might even have used a Tri-Elmar-M for the shot.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), January 28, 2002.

Good shootimg, Tom. Your photos prove that sports can be done "the old fashioned way" with an RF and a little pre-planning, even though an SLR with auto-focus is often preferred for the task these days.

I watched an interesting program on PBS the other evening dealing with photography in sports and such. The really memorable shots were all done prior to auto-everything being available. Perhaps there's something to this "Leica Philosophy" thing afterall. ;-)

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), January 28, 2002.

I don't usually go a bundle on sports shots but those two basket ball shots are very good. Maybe it's because you were using a 50 (instead of the usual telezoom) but they took me right to the action. Worth the extra effort.

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), January 28, 2002.

Excellent. I would have said your website was perpetually unstarted, though! Look forward to seeing more snaps.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 28, 2002.

this dog was running along us on our new-year walk this year. i shot with the voigtlander 21, exposure, framing and distance guesstimated. ilford tri-x @ 800.

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), January 28, 2002.

No wonder he looks cross-eyed! Anyway, the 21 is cheating, be fair.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 28, 2002.

Frank is right about the flash sync being only 1/50th, but one hardly ever uses the full frame image in sports photography, and there is such a small difference between 1/50th and 1/60th, you can get away with the very small, almost negligible under-exposed portion on the left side of the frame. In a fill-flash situation, as has been discussed here before, that would go un noticed.

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 28, 2002.

Many a great shot was made with a wooden tennis racket, or forged irons with steel shafts, and I'm sure there are those who still use them recreationally. But modern technology has raised the bar and one has to embrace it to be competitive professionally. If your living depends on shooting action, you use the equipment that keeps you competitive, that gets you the kind of spectacular action shots editors are accustomed to, and as many of them as you can get on a roll. And today, you mostly do it digitally.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 28, 2002.

It was not my intention in this thread to suggest someone try to make a living shooting sports with an M6. I just wanted to show some of these people who think shooting action with one is impossible, it CAN be done.

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 28, 2002.

Hi, Tom:

Yes, you made your point (IMO).

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), January 28, 2002.

you gain nothing by using a leica for basketball shots like those....thats typically why most people dont use a leica for sports....

-- grant (g4lamos@yahoo.com), January 28, 2002.

The horse is dead already, huh?

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 28, 2002.