* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

EOS VS Leica or Bessa

Anyone have any thoughts on using an EOS 1 and a 35 1.4 for low light/ night photography of people vs. range finder. I am considering purchasing the aforementioned lens rather than buying a completely new kit for this kind of work. I’m used to using my Mamiya 7 which is quiet but becomes turtle slow once night falls. I own an EOS 1 but not any fast lenses yet. Thanks folks.

by Jason Geller at 2005-10-03 13:48:51 UTC (ed. Mar 12 2008 ) | Bookmark | | Report spam→

In truth, here is my 2 cents worth about cameras (as well as lens/film, etc). Although, its probably a hay-penny worth: 2 cents is inflationary when it comes to my opinions ;)). Camera’s should be (or will be) like part of your body. Each person should search for that which feels the most natural. Light Snapping is not, in truth, that different from sex or dancing. You’ll know that best partner when your limbs dance in tandem: that’s quite the dance indeed. I know photographers who make astonishing dreams with Mamiya’s and those whose work looks like stone; those who would divorce their partner before letting go of their Leica and those who wouldnt part with their $80 Holga.  Night Photo., requires its own rhythm, experience, desire, etc. : Bosa Nova vs. Tango, etc…………..I think its more important to begin to think about this question: why are you making photographs, what about this story telling is important to you and in which manner do you wish to speak…those will direct you (as will experience)….the camera does not make the photographer, the photographer makes the camera ;)…….have fun…cheers, Bob

by [former member] | 03 Oct 2005 15:10 (ed. Oct 3 2005) | Toronto, Canada | | Report spam→
Bob could not be more right…you can make great night pictures with just about anything…BUT for each system, besides being a right dancing partner for you or not, has its own particularities…sometimes a turtle will take a great night image…no rule, good rule…

Mamiya 7

—Leica M__



Hasselblad X-Pan

Go figure…

by [former member] | 04 Oct 2005 01:10 (ed. Oct 4 2005) | | Report spam→
I would second what Bob and Bruno say about camera’s. That said, I would suggest the Leica over the Bessa for it’s durability and clearer rangefinder (which helps at night). If cost is an issue, then get an M4-2 (not M4-p) it does not have a meter, but at night a meter in camera is not usually necesary.
Happy Shooting :-)

by Aaron Lee Fineman | 05 Oct 2005 17:10 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
These are all the cameras which take Leica M lenses:

M2: 35mm, 50mm, & 90mm frame lines, no hotshoe, no leicavit/motor capability. 1950s-60s.

M3: 50mm, 90mm, & 135mm frame lines, no hotshoe, no leicavit/motor capability. 1960s.

M4: 35mm, 50mm, & 90mm frame lines, hotshoe, no leicavit/motor, VERY EXPENSIVE collector item, 1970sa

M4-2: 35mm, 50mm, & 90mm frame lines, hotshoe, YES for leicavit/motor, however avoid early production unless overhauled. 1970s-80s

M4-P: 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 90mm frame lines, hotshoe, good for leicavit/motor. best leica without meter. 1980s

M5: bigger size camera with light meter. but very expensive collector’s item also. 1970s.

M6 classic: 28mm-135mm frame lines, hotshoe, motor/leicavit, built in meter. Best buy. good examples for $900-$1200 on eBay or $1100-$1400 in stores. 1980s-90s.

M6 TTL models: bigger body, bigger shutter speed dial, not for purists. 1990s-2000s.

M7: oh my god, auto exposure in a Leica! up to 1980 technology in 2004! $3000! current.

MP: even more expensive than the M7. current.

Konica Hexar RF: interesting camera, built-in motordrive and auro-exposure. but no spare parts? no longer in production.

Voigtlander Bessa R2 (and R3 variants): under-rated. built in meter and can take leicavit style trigger wider. i took one to new orleans along with my M6 because my M4-2 was in the shop and it did quite well. but, the shutter IS louder than the leicas.

Voigtlander Bessa T is weird, without viewfinder.

Leica and Minolta CL and CLE models: small and pocketable but hard to shoot quickly. quiet. 1970s-80s.

Epson Voigtlander RD-1: the first digital M. Way overpriced for what it is.

i think that’s it except for microscope and other special models from 1950s-60s. M2 and M3 are classic, totally reliable but without modern features. M4-P and M6 classic are the most affordable and practical more recent models. My M4-2 has required a lot of repair as it was one of the bad early ones. now it’s good.

by [former member] | 05 Oct 2005 20:10 | Southland Again, United States | | Report spam→
Bollox to all that.
You know your Canon so stick to it. That 1.4 lens is a gem, I hear. I shoot Nikon, though increasingly reluctantly (it’s a chip thing).
My first system was a Canon T90 and I had some primes back then and they were SHARP and contrasty. (I went to Nikon because my first staff cameras were Nikons.)
The Nikon primes are gorgeous as well. I dreamed of Leicas for years and ended up with a Hexar 35 F2 and it is terrific. However, my best night shots, and I have a lot, were made with Nikon SLRs with fast prime and zoom lenses.
With an SLR I can hand hold steady at one second with a prime lens. We all should be able to do that. A well built pro SLR camera will not give you vibration problems at slow shutter speeds. That’s rubbish.
Joe Rodriguez shot his Harlem material with a Canon 35mm F1.4. He swears by that lens.

by Paul Treacy | 05 Oct 2005 21:10 (ed. Oct 5 2005) | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
Alberto Contreras was a fellow student at ICP and he just shot with a simple fixed lens and on a basic Canon SLR, one of those silver body things, maybe an elan or some such. Anyway, his work is truely unique and he lives in a strange dark place photographically. That young man has genius but we hear little about him these days.

by Paul Treacy | 05 Oct 2005 21:10 | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
bodies (camera) mean shit……………………by the way, its irrelevant if you "hear" about a photographer…………………I’ve never been to ICP and i can tell you this, i Love Alberto’s photo (let’s say, the Private.it is a common bond ;) ), but,  these questions are absurd………live……………breath………I grow weary of this place, in truth……………bob///………I can speak of sipping in rosa zona something (god forgive) and its all the same………………………..Alberto is glorious and so are others; abundance………..this lightstalkers is beginning to depress…….

by [former member] | 05 Oct 2005 21:10 (ed. Oct 5 2005) | Toronto, Canada | | Report spam→
i agree with bob. just go out and do what you gotta do…….dont worry about the tools as long as theyre workin….

by grant | 05 Oct 2005 21:10 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
Grant’s absolutely right.

by Paul Treacy | 05 Oct 2005 22:10 | New York City, United States | | Report spam→
my point earler up..as long as you feel good using a camera, that is the answer to the question…but there could be many answers…and hey, my Leica M2 is turning 40 in a couple of months…I’ll buy him a trip as a birthday present ;-)

by [former member] | 05 Oct 2005 23:10 (ed. Oct 5 2005) | | Report spam→
you should get him a slutty dlsr to frolic with for a night or two

by grant | 06 Oct 2005 12:10 | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
Bob!  Dont get all gloomy on us.  you know there always will be a hefty amount of technofilia whenever a bunch of photographers get together to discuss their toys.  the real point, as you well know, the thing that sustains us, is that dance of life, and who can tell the dancer from the dance? 

"…Maria yo te vi bailando, bailando con la puerta abierta . . . "

y sigo bailando yo, aki en Kiskeya la Bella

by Jon Anderson | 07 Oct 2005 10:10 (ed. Oct 7 2005) | St Domingo, Dominican Republic | | Report spam→
Jon: :)))..You’re like totally right, to paraphrase one of my students ;)))))……i was only partially gloomy ;)))…i always have to be careful because I know indeed, when a bunch of photographers gather there’s always a lot of discussion about toys: my wife (also a photographer and artist) is one of the few who never does, and always teases me when I start talking about the technical questions (which in general I also hate) :)))..actually, I think I was drinking when i wrote that so I was trying to be properly teasing ;))…damn emails are so bloody dry, unlike my booze cabinent ;))…love the quote and since I cant (not yet) send a drink to you through this webby connected world,  instead this: "I would believe only in a God that knows how to dance"  :)))……im not really that gloomy…Le deseo un gran compañero de baile para esta tarde que le barrerá en el balanceo de su cuerpo como los armas navales… ;))..boba


by [former member] | 07 Oct 2005 13:10 | Toronto, Canada | | Report spam→
funny you should mention that, all my favorite gods are ones that dance: krishna, durga, chango, Iansa, Ochun, Ochossi, Dionysus, a few others.  ¡a bailar!

by Jon Anderson | 07 Oct 2005 13:10 (ed. Oct 7 2005) | St Domingo, Dominican Republic | | Report spam→

More about sponsorship→


Jason Geller, Photographer Jason Geller
Greenpoint , United States
Aaron Lee Fineman, Photographer Aaron Lee Fineman
New York City , United States
Paul  Treacy, Photographer Paul Treacy
London , United Kingdom ( LGW )
grant, Photographer grant
[undisclosed location].
Jon Anderson, Photographer & Writer Jon Anderson
Photographer & Writer
Ocala Florida , United States


Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2015 November Eleven