Thanks,

I've learned many technical and practical lessons viewing this forum for a little over three months. But, what I consider the most valuable lesson learned is shooting wide open.

I never before tried this technique. I'd always wanted to use the "optimum" aperture, usually f8.0 and vary the shutter speed. When the speed approached 1/15, I'd (yes, I admit it. But, those are past sins) then go to flash, and sometimes a tripod. I do own and carry these, even now (small table top tripod).

I'd always bought fast lenses so I could use f5.6 or, my God, f4.0; optimum being 2-3 stops below full open.

Thanks to y'all, I'm actually trying to use full open whenever possible, and looking for more subjects in available darkness.

The second concept I learned here is about Bokeh. I never looked for it before, and I think, sub-consciously, it's why I like one photo over another because of how OOF areas are rendered. I guess that's why I never upgraded from my first version 35 Summicron.

Where is the thread with family photos shot with the Noctilux? I remember the shot of the boy laying on the ground made me dizzy and gave me a headache because the background looked like it was rotating/spinning.

Et Al.

Thanks and keep 'em coming.

-- Chris Chen (chrischen@msn.com), January 19, 2002

Answers

Chris, the home webpage for the site you seek is as follows:

http://www.shinozuka-family.com/

-- David (pagedt@chartertn.net), January 19, 2002.

They're just tools Chris. Use them accordingly. I use to shoot at exclusively F5.6 before as well. Actually, my dad was a strict adherent to the Sunny 16 rule and always kept his Nikon F2 set at F8/ 1/500th during the day as far back as I can remember. My highschool English teacher Mr. Armstrong ran the photography club and was also a strict advocate of using the smallest aperture that you can get away with for any application. I think he was subconciously afraid that students would come back with out of focus subjects more often than not. Because the photo club was not well funded, resources were tight. Now, after several years of having paid to process my own film I am also learning to appreciate layers of depth and OOF rendition (I will restrain from using the "B" word of Leicaheretics") although I admit I'm still a newbie here too and tend to EXAGGERATE my "B" shots (see previous postings).

But I suppose its like anything in life, you have to learn where the happy media is and how much is "just enough" whippin' to get that souffle to rise gracefully!

Thanks for sharing,

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 19, 2002.

Choosing apertures should be based on the DOF you want for a particular shot, not a load of internet blather that tries to shame everyone into always shooting Leica lenses wide open. Leica lenses don't make you pay a severe performance penalty for shooting wide open, and that's indeed a good thing. But if you constrict all your photography to subject-isolation, bokeh-backround shots made wide open, you are self-imposing unnecessary limitations on your output.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 19, 2002.

I really have to agree with Jay. Just because you use Leica lenses doesn't mean you have to shoot wide open and get lots of "bokeh" and OOF areas. If you need DOF, then stop down. All of this dogma (don't use a flash, don't use a tripod, always shoot wide open, etc) about how one is supposed to use Leica is pure B.S. You use the equipment/techniques that will allow you to get the shot according to your vision. Following these so-called "commandments" and "rules" that someone else set up is stupid. Like Jay said, why should you impose limitations on your work.

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), January 19, 2002.

I agree with what has been said about choosing the aperture for the right application. But in the spirit of Chris' post, I too have found that I feel I have more freedom to hang out at larger aperture if need be, and not feel I will much compromise image quality, and that subject off center images will not suffer either. Before with other lenses, I felt as if I needed a 1 stop buffer from the max. aperture, making a 28/2.8 really a 28/4 or something, for instance.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), January 19, 2002.

Chris,

M Leica's excel in lowlight documentary type photographic situations. The ability to shoot indoors with available lighting and retain good quality images is only possible with large aperatures, accurate focus and low shutter vibration.

Limited DOF is a natural consequence of wideopen aperatures. The fact that many Leica lenses, particularly the non Asp. lenses, have a smooth transaction between out of focus and in focus zones is a wonderful added bonus. This of course is just a tool that can be utilized in the final "artistic" visualization of your photograph.

Will your images be sharper with flash and at F5.6/8 with your glass? Yes. Is even more true is you mount your camera on a tripod? Yes. Does this provide a different feel to an image taken handheld at F1 in available lighting? Yes.

Play with your equipment and try variations to see what resulting images appeal best to you. I used to be F8 and be there...with flash. But since I have aquired an M6 and a Noctilux 50F1 my preferences have changed....even if my images are now not quite as sharp as they once were.

I guess I've seen the light...:-)

Simon

-- Simon Wong (drsimonwong@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

".....you are self-imposing unnecessary limitations on your output."

Hmmm. As in the 'unnecessary limitations' of the Haiku, sonnet, and other poetry forms?

Sometimes setting limits for one's self (as in, e.g., using a certain German camera that can't shoot lenses longer than 135) can be a boost to creativity, forcing you to cross off some 'easy' solutions in favor of more elegant ones. Just a thought.

But - on the whole I don't disagree with Jay, Richard or Tse-Sung. Use (or don't use) flash, tripod, fast film, slow film, large aperture, small aperture. There's nothing wrong with setting YOURSELF limits - just don't accept limits imposed by the prejudices of others.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), January 20, 2002.