A theory as to why HCB would only use the collapsible 'cron

[ronald_moravec1]

I just don`t understand how he could put a chrome lens on a black body. He doesn`t have a proper lens shade either.

 

He just wraped the strap around his lower arm instead of getting a fancy wrist strap.

 

Imagagine how he got any pics at all.

[ky2]

LOL.

 

I dont think HCB cared a bit whether is collapsable is "sharp enough". Real photographers don't give a damn about such measurebator stance.

[jeremy_tok]

Sorry guys -- what a bunch of stupid responses. I was expecting more. Those who can do better: it's not too late to jump in. Show me the intellectual level at pnet is not this low.

 

Here are some of the, um, well, *stuff* you wrote.

 

1. Soft lens doesn't mask focussing inaccuracies.

 

This is so lame I'm not even going to comment. One wonders how synapses function in some people's brains.

 

2. Later Summicirons do not have a big enough difference over the collapsible to justify switch.

 

Oh really? Think so, do you?

 

3. Compactness

 

This is probably the least bad among them all.

 

4. He used what was available

 

Then tell me why a collapsible on an M6 as evidenced in the picture (up). HCB went out of his way to use that lens.

 

There is a picture of HCB in Leica's offices in Osterloh's "Leica M". He was trying out his collapsible on an M6 with a Leica officer standing by watching.

 

**********

 

I was sort of hoping someone would say "It isn't just any collapsible! It is one particular collapsible! He believes that particular one brings him luck."

[Karim Ghantous]

Jeremy, we don't exist to bid for your approval. And I don't like your theory. It's fine to be intellectual about photography but I think you're just in love with your theory so much you can't see past it.

 

Now think about it. If a soft lens covered up focussing inaccuracies then it would have to be pretty soft - so even if focussing *was* accurate the lens would still give a very soft image. One thing that *can* cover up focussing inaccuracy is DOF - wouldn't you know it, he usually shot at f/8.0. ::gobsmacked::

[arraga]

<p><i>

Sorry guys -- what a bunch of stupid responses. I was expecting more. Those who can do better: it's not too late to jump in. Show me the intellectual level at pnet is not this low.

</i>

 

<p>Go find other dogs to jump thru your hoops, then.

 

<p>Woof!!

[jeremy_tok]

But the dogs do not jump, they only bark.

[jeremy_tok]

Karim, Karim ... sigh.

[travis1]

It isn't just any collapsible! It is one particular collapsible! He believes that particular one brings him luck.

[piotr_panne]

<<<Show me the intellectual level at pnet is not this low. >>>

 

Now I\'m really tokked off.

[awahlster]

maybe he was just a cheap SOB and figured that once he bought a lens he was going to use it until he couldn't any more

[dstate1]

Ok there Jeremy, buddy, do you OWN a Summicron colapsable? Do you have any

experience with the optics you refer to? I can't believe I actually answered this

post...My mind must be slipping.

[al_kaplan1]

I think that Mark got the answer right! HCB wasn't out to impress anyone with the newest shiniest bestest chunk of glass out of Wetzlar. It made pictures. End of story.

[jeremy_tok]

The problem with the "Good is good enough" theory is that he upgraded bodies. But not the lens.

[al_kaplan1]

Shutters, advance mechanisms, rangefinders all eventually wear out or get badly out of adjustment. Lenses less so.

[socke]

Jeremy, I'm under the impression that bodies wear out faster than lenses. And HCB was most probably in a position where he could get a new M cheaper than what we pay on a shutter repair.

 

Lenses are different, even I have lenses which I'm used to and where I just know what I get, new and improved would mean different and relearning to me.

 

AFAIK HCB didn't even need a viewfinder anymore so the body is even less important to him.

 

So to me it makes sense to stick to a lens as long as possible and change the bodies when something doesn't work as expected anymore.

[Brad_]

Thanks for the theories! I've been on pins and needles wanting to know the reason.

[al_kaplan1]

That's nothing compared to what the rest of us have been through waiting for Leica Maven Brad to tell us his theories. We really miss the Voice of Experience. Tell us, Brad. We're all dying to hear what you have to say.

[aizan_sasayama]

good answer, feli.

[karl_keung]

agree with Dan on coll. cron's technical performance. it also seems to be less flare prone than

the rigid summicron that follows it. its coating also seems to be more stable than those early

rigid summicron.

[stuart_richardson]

The 50mm summicron collapsible is a very sharp, albeit low contrast lens. There is

nothing "soft" about it. Certainly not enough to cover up focusing errors. Here are a few

samples of it, with detailed crops. These are meant as technical examples, not great

photos. I have plenty of normal photos at my website, so if you want to see actual picture

go there. Now, anyway, here:<P>

 

<img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/neighbors-cat-collapsible2.jpg"><P><img

src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/neighbors-cat-detail.jpg"><P>Here is a

comparison of the collapsible summicron at f/2 compared to the 50mm summilux asph at

1.4. Both focused with a magnified and shot on a tripod with a cable release.

<P>Collapsible<P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/

bt-50collapsible.jpg"><P>ASPH <P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/

bt-50asph.jpg"><P>collapsible crop <P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/

bt-50collapsible-crop.jpg"><P>ASPH crop<P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/bt-50asph-crop.jpg"><P>So, I think your theory is wrong.

This is based on my use of the collapsible cron, as well as the latest 50mm summicron and

the 50mm summilux ASPH. I should add that my 50 collapsible has coating damage, slight

haze and a pitting.

[jtdnyc]

In the photo of HCB that Jeremy posted early in the thread, the master seems to be using a black band to secure a lens cap to his left pinkie.

 

Anybody know the part number?

[leon chang]

This is what happened when HCB went to the store to shop for a lens:

 

Salesman (showing the 50'cron collapsable): "What about this lens sir? It's 50 mm, great for composition. Not too little nor too much will appear in your photographs".

HCB: "Is it sharp"?

Salesman: "It sure is sir"

HCB: "It's small and sharp. Just what I need for travelling. I'll take it."

 

End of the story. Do you really think HCB was interested in lens tests? This man could shoot the hell out of all of us with a disposible plastic camera.

[leon chang]

Besides that, did anyone ever see "The impassionate eye"?

 

In this documentary, HCB shows his photographs and he actually talks about the photographs with great passion. He never talks about gear or lenses. You see? For a real photographer it's the shot that counts. His pictures would have been famous even if he'd have used a different camera than a Leica.

[leon chang]

Sidenote: Stuart, what scanner did you use to scan those B&W shots? On my Coolscan V, B&W seems to come out a bit too grainy... .(Tri-x 400)

[uk]

I'm with Ellis on this.

 

The camera and lens slipped into his pocket thereby enabling to have his Leica with him at

all times. 'The man' was always ready to take a photograph at a moments notice and

without the subject being aware. That separated him from the 90%+ of photographers

carrying the alternative camera of he day.

 

There's no doubt he would be lugging the Canon 1Ds around if he was a photographer of

our time.