samir Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 I have the opportunity to spend 2 or 3 years in Africa... I have a digital 10D with me but obviously cannot rely only on that one, and I have a M3 with a 90mm and a VC 25mm. I really think I need a 35mm, my preference would be a 1.4...Which model would you recommend? I may try to get a m7 or mp, but not sure yet... Also, I will stock a lot of films (colors and Bw): what films would you recommend that have wide latitude to development? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry_lehrer Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 Sam Where in Africa? It goes from the extremely civilised Capetown to the lawless and intemperate Congo. Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geddert Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 if you intend to do animal photography in national parks you will not be happy with a Leica M... i have a leica M and am so glad i brought an EOS with a 400mm lens instead when i visited there... if you are doing people photography i the same rules apply as they would whereever you currently live. I.e. some like a 24/35/90 some like a 28/50/90 some like 21/35/50, etc. it all really depends on your personal preferences.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob F. Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 If you are basically happy with the M3 but just feel the need for a 35mm lens, you might consider a 35mm Summicron or Summilux with "eyes" to adapt it for use with the M3. These show up all the time on ebay. But it may be that you really want an M7 or MP, in which case you should get one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samir Posted June 19, 2003 Author Share Posted June 19, 2003 It will be in Madagascar. I am not into animal photography, so the 400mm lens is not something I have in mind now. The love the M3 but I would feel sorry if it fails on me...unless it turns out there is a Leica specialist in Madagascar... How does the old 35mm with eye compare to the latest ASPH 35mm? Is there a big difference between the 1.4 and 2.0...I often shoot in low light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphicjoe Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 I would take my M6 or M3 and 35 and 50 mm f2 lenses. I have, and love the M3, but most people would want a camera with a meter. I generally use a spot meter, so the M3 works for me. The M3 is probably the least likely camera to malfunction, although it could happen, hence the value of taking two bodies and two lenses, either of which could be your primary lens. That's why I suggest the 35 and 50. I envy you your time in Africa. It's one of the places I would most like to visit. Happy trails, Joe S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 How about a good old 50 Cron or Lux? The M3 is perfect for a 50 and it will give you a little more reach (distance between you and the subject) than the 35. Africa is a big, wide open country and the 50 may be better at cropping things out of the world. Recently I spent a month in Germany and mostly used the 35, because of the narrow streets etc.. Back here in Los Angeles I use the 50 more often, because the streets are wider and the spaces are more open. For b/w film I would recommend Tri-X. I have read that it is more heat tolerant than most stocks, besides all of it's other strong points. feli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abufletcher Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Why do people talk about "Africa" like it's a single country??? I mean, we don't go around saying that we are planning to spend a few years in Asia or North America. Last time I checked this diverse continent contained 60 some nations and nearly 2/3 of the world's languages. Any equipment recommendation can be little more than a reflection of long-held stereotypes (e.g. AFRICA is a primative place, AFRICA is full of animals, AFRICA is s sulty place, etc.). BTW, I'm dying of curiosity, Samir. Where might you be going and what would you be doing? Personally, I recently saw an announcement for a job in Equatorial Guinea teaching TOEFL to Spanish speaking Engineering students. I liked the idea but it didn't appeal much to the misses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry_szarek Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Samir, first find out what local photo stores can do for developing on film, you don't want to air mail film out of country to get developed. Lenses I would go with a 21 (landscapes), a 35 F1.4 (low light), a 50 F2 (small compact) and either a 90 or 135 for portraits. I would get at least one extra body, like a Hexar RF (check the focus before you go), this is a lot cheaper than M7, you already have the best low light camera around the M3. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristian dowling Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 I've always been a big advocate of teh 35/1.4 ASPH, which is a fantastic lens. But recently i changed to the 35/2 ASPH due to the following advantages: Less distortion, less flare, less weight, less money to pay, less viewfinder obstruction, less bulk and easier to focus. Sometimes, less is better. Films, anything you like-mainly the ones you can't get in Africa. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samir Posted June 20, 2003 Author Share Posted June 20, 2003 Gerry, What do you mean by checking the Focus with the Hexar? Is the Hexar not compatible with some Leica lenses? Samir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry_szarek Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Some (I repeat some, my did) did not focus correctly, it was easily corrected for $50 by Konica in NJ. Most Hexar RF's do NOT have this problem. BTW it's a great camera, a total bargin compared to an M7 plus it gives 1/4000th of second, built in motor, and easy film loading. Forgot it only costs ~$700 to ~800 new! Gerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricks Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Sounds like you have a good and trusted set up. Alt. get a 50/1.4 instead of the 90 and you have a great combo - I love the M3 & 50 combo. A 50 and a 25 w/ separate finder will take you a long way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samir Posted June 20, 2003 Author Share Posted June 20, 2003 Is the Hexar as light and as quite as a Leica M? What about reliability...which is what matter most to me now (I do not think I can expect any service/authorized repair). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 The Hexar RF is about the same weight as an M body, but with a built-in motor. You'd better take many sets of batteries though; I don't think that those lithium batteries will be easy to find where you're going. It's definitely noisier than an M body, with those motors running after each shot. The 1/4000 sec is a boon with high speed film and daylight though. The M3 will be much more durable, IMO, than the Hexar RF, and it doesn't need batteries. THe 50mm lens is THE lens for an M3, a 35 will require a VF to be right. It would be hard to beat a 25/50/90 setup with an M3. Leave the 25's finder on the camera all the time to save losing it. IMO, any good Kodak or Fuji C-41 film would be OK. They have exceptional latitude. Get a little selenium meter (battery-less) or something like the digisix, which will weight next-to-nothing, to verify metering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 I'm not sure if you are going to find a steady supply of batteries for the Hexar, where you are going. I would get a CLA on the M3, add a 50mm lens and shoot away. feli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_bender Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Something cheap, cheap, and several bodies? Something you'd not be afraid to lose to dust or fungus (where in Africa?)? Something that is purely mechanical, i.e. a drop of water on it does not burn electronic circuits inside? Something that does not eat batteries, whether disposable or rechargeable, with the speed of a redneck eating hamburgers? <p> Bessa R2s? Or even a bunch of (more disposable) R's? Old and cheaper Leica bodies? Leica clones ($20 apiece)? Probably - if the old-fashioned body does not have a built-in meter - something like Gossen Digisix meter, tiny, cheap, lasting forever on a small battery, and measuring temperatures and time as well as exposures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob F. Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Samir: The old 35 with eyes can either be a Summicron (f/2) or a Summaron (f/2.8). The Summicron will be the 8-element version, and is very sharp. The ASPH should beat it, wide open. At f/4, f/5.6, and f/8, I cannot see a difference, even with the camera on a tripod. It would be a way to add a 35 and still be able to use your M3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samir Posted June 20, 2003 Author Share Posted June 20, 2003 Rob, Do you have an idea of the price of such a 35mm f/2 with the eye? Do you know od a reliable source where to get one? Are these 35mm compatible with m6/m7/mp? Also how easy (difficult) is it to switch lenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_lofquist Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 The first time I went to East Africa (for 2 months)I only had my two Leicas with me and lenses from 35-200mm. It was a good thing that I had two bodies as one shutter went bad immediately, even though I had had it serviced before I left. I had not gone with the idea of photographing wildlife but it was so amazing that I was in awe of everything I was seeing. I returned several years later for about 6 weeks. I realized that an RF was not sufficient for doing justice to the ambience. I still brought one Leica but augmented it with an AF SLR and an assortment of lenses going up to 400mm. If I were to go back again, I would take a 500 f/4 and a 300 f/4 with a 1.4X TC. To go to Africa without taking in the wildlife while it still exists, is unconscionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_fusion Posted June 24, 2003 Share Posted June 24, 2003 >>Do you have an idea of the price of such a 35mm f/2 with the eye? Do you know od a reliable source where to get one? Are these 35mm compatible with m6/m7/mp? Also how easy (difficult) is it to switch lenses? Samir, have a look at ebay, goggled 35mm are sometimes available with 2,8 Summaron, 2,0 Summicron or - very expensive - 1,4 Summilux. Today you will find six lenses: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2936183714&category=30063 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2936399227&category=30030 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935940103&category=3330 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935455236&category=30063 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2936079684&category=30063 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2936204123&category=30063 All these 35mm goggled lenses are compatible with every leica-m. You will see the 50mm-frame instead of the 35mm-frame. But you can not use them with leica-cl. Switching is as easy as with normal lenses, but the goggled lenses need more space in your bag and you must be more careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now