Dave Murray

Apparently the Angenieux lenses are being currently snapped up by cine users. I’d read somewhere that the 45-90 was the first zoom for the Leicaflex. I’d say that this focal length group was ideal for portraits. For aficionados of the standard focal length, this would be ideal. Quite a few Leicaflex and Leica R users praise the 60mm f2.8 Macro-Elmarit as a standard lens, rather than the 50mm f2 Summicron. As for the Telyts, I have a 250mm f4 that’s incredibly heavy and has a non-rotating tripod mount. It weighs some 1.5 Kilos. Would make a superb anti-mugger weapon, it would certainly be manslaughter!

I’m grateful to wgpinc for mentioning Fulvio Roiter, I’d not heard of him but I’m going to take a look. Jeffrey L.T. Von Gluck mentioned DDD and his use of the 45-90 Angenieux f2.8 zoom (made, I understand, with several mounts to enable it to be used on different cameras, rather like the Schneider Kreuznach P.A. Curtagon 35mm f4 shift lens. I use one on my pair of Leicaflex bodies, a mk1 & mk11. I’d like the zoom and an English classic camera dealer has one in stock. Problem is it’s £899 + insured carriage of some £30. So I use the Schneider and an old 100 F4 macro Elmar for portraits. My meters don’t work so I use the Gossen Lunalite as it’s solid state. Given that my bodies are 1964 & 1966, apart from the meters, they work fine. This stuff was certainly built to last. I prefer the Leicaflex to its successors the SL and SL2. I like the quirkiness of it combined with mirror lock. Preview button? I can look at the scale on the lens. I find that far more informative. However, the Curtagon is focused wide open and stopped down before the shot is taken anyway.

At one time the older Rolleicord with the three element Triotar lens was regarded as a poor relation of the Rollei family. Not any more: people have discovered that the lens, with various apertures employed, can give a certain look to portraits that’s difficult to achieve except with specific lenses. The Leitz Thambar 90mm f2.2 with the centre-spot filter comes to mind and, in more recent years, Nikon produced a medium telephoto SLR lens with a defocus adjustment ring - hideously expensive and difficult to obtain as not that many made. But search the classic camera dealers websites or the ‘bay and you’ll find early ‘cords, prior to the 111 with the Triotar lens. It’s very much a matter of trial and error as the amount of softness is varied by the aperture.

I’ve used the pre-R Leicaflex and Leicaflex SL cameras pretty extensively and, apart from dud meters, found them to be exceptionally reliable. Of course, if the meters had worked, they’ll be inaccurate as the correct Mercury Oxide cell hasn’t been available for 30? Years. The later, Leica R8 and it’s updated R9 are Leica designed and built. I now use three of these bodies and find them a delight to use. Now the Nikon D1X, I bought one a few years ago. A long way from Leica M3 and Leicaflex. A chap in a photographic shop in town where I went for a memory card, said he had used the D1X extensively in the past as a wedding photographer. He set up my camera to use as a point and shoot. Switch on and it’s set toMatrix metering and Program. Very easy. I can review and delete if necessary, I can find mono if I want. I’ve now got a lens with an aperture ring and can set this and change the camera to aperture priority. I have acquired a manual. Found flash a bit confusing but it seems dedicated units are required. So, on the whole, I don’t find that the D1X is more complicated to use than the R8 as I use Program and Matrix metering for both.

I was a late convert to Digital, having used 127 film from 1960 and 35mm from 1976 (Pentax S1a). Leica M since 2007. A few years ago I bought a Nikon D1X for £179 with 15 days warranty. A 24-120mm lens was bought shortly after. I was fortunate to encounter a pro in a camera shop where I went for a card. He had used D1X extensively for weddings etc. He set up my camera for easy use: P with Matrix metering and showed me how to playback the images. I use a card reader to display the shots on an old Panasonic Toughbook £100 on eBay! I’m not sure about RAW, TIFF, JPEG, or fringing but I got a handbook and can make it shoot Mono. My son is a Petrolhead and spent £17K on his Va-Va-Voom car. I took a dozen shots and gave him prints and a disc. It was printed in a Va-Va-Voom mag. Last year I got a mint second body from ebayuk, £99. The seller thought it had hardly been used. I bought three replacement batteries after buying second body. I’m not going to upgrade to D2X, D3X, D4, D5 or (is there) a D6? I’m fine as I am. I don’t take a lot of shots so the NMH batteries are fine for me. If we could get a Li-Ion battery I’d get a couple.

I have a pair of D1X cameras that I greatly enjoy using. The batteries, replaced immediately upon purchase don’t last as long as I’d like. When I replace them, it will be a full frame D3. That way, when I pop a 35mm lens on, I get a 35mm fov and not one of 52.5mm. That’s my only complaint. The rear screen is adequate for me but others squint at it. It’s poor compared to the new Canon 1300D I bought my grandson for his 12th birthday. If it would lengthen battery life, I’d turn it off. Anyone know how?

Salgado is also a fan of the 60mm f2.8 Macro-Elmar R. He generally used it with 35mm f2 Summicron R and the 28mm f2.8 Elmarit R. He also was a fan of the manual exposure-only R6. Like the Leicaflex trio, the R6 and it’s version two were made in Germany. I found the metering arrows and dot in the R6 difficult to see so I sold it. I still prefer my pair of Leicaflex bodies with dud meters. I have long experience of using handheld. last year I acquired three R8. Pity they cannot be repaired, that’s why I bought three. Still have the ‘flexes to fall back on. All 3 cam lenses but one, 3rd cam only.

Kardum: do you have the original rubber lens hood for your 90/f4? I have this and the 40mm f2 , both have series 5.5 filters.

I’ve used the 135mm F4.5 Hektor since 2007 when, followed a legacy, I acquired a pair of M3 bodies. Later, I read that the Hektor was a dog of a lens (it was named after Max Berek’s dog ). I felt that perhaps I should have spent more on an Elmar. I used it for a few moody landscapes etc. A couple of years ago, I read that people were seeking the Hektor for portraits. Just as old Rolleicords with the three element Triotar lenses were being sought for the same reasons. So, I’m going to take portraits using my old Hektor from the 1950s and vary the aperture to achieve a good range of sharpness. Mono film An interesting guy. And make him stare, moodily at me. Jeff Rojas, you’re going to have serious competition. Never mind the pixels, bring on Ilford FP4.

I use a pair of Leicaflex bodies, 1964/1966. Meters are not used as I prefer handheld, reflective and incidental. The Weston Master V I’ve used since 1981 with a Nikkormat is still giving accurate readings. 90% of my shots are taken with the 35mm F2 Summicron (E55) lens and I also use the 90mm F2.8 Elmarit for portraits. The centre focus spot took a little getting used to but practice makes perfect. These are superb bits of kit and attract interest every time I have one around my neck. The stuff is heavy, but is it heavier than the Nikon F or ‘mat? I don’t think so. My Canadian made 50mm F2 and 28mm F2.8 are not at all heavy. The 135mm F2.8 Elmarit is seriously heavy and the 250mm F4 Telyt could easily kill somebody. I’ve not found a 350mm F4.8 but I expect that will be heavier than the 250 but better to swing against an assailant. I love this stuff just as I love my Omega Speedmaster and my Mont-Blanc pens and pencils and leather goods. And the best car on the road chaps? Mercedes Benz.