alan_simon

Dear Forum Readers:

In the past, you have helped me choose a 28mm 'cron rather than a Tri

Elmar and a second body to go with my .85 MP (I chose the .58).

Well, I just returned from 15 glorious days in Italy (albeit HOT) and

I have some new images. I haven't used b&w for years and I'd love

your opinions. This trip, my wife did the travel-bit, very

successfully with her Contax NX and a 28-80 zoom, while I had my two

cameras-one with the 28mm 'cron and the other with a 50mm 'lux-both

loaded with Ilford's Delta 400-shot at ISO 250.

I'm posting the results. Any and all suggestions are welcomed.

Al<div></div>

Paul,

I just returned from 17 days in Italy and I THINK that I now have my ideal kit:

2 MPs-a 0.58, that had a 28 'cron on it during the day, and a 0.85 with a 50 'lux. I kept a 35 'lux for the evenings or when I wanted a one-camera outfit-the .58. Its single 35mm frame is a delight! I had a 90 Elmarit and a 1.25 magnifier, but they never found their way on to the .85.

The kit seemed to work for me, but I'm sure that there might be a new, ideal outfit someday in the future.

Happy image making,

Al

If one thinks of the viewfinder on the M camera as a lens then it has

several optical charcteristics: angle of view (roughly outlined by

the framelines), magnification (differs for the .58, .72, and

the .85) and focal length, the foreground to background relationship-

the relative sizes of near and far objects.

Not having any point of reference (i.e., a slr camera) I'm wondering

what is the apparent lens characteristic (focal length) of the

different viewfinders. I know that this sounds confusing and I

haven't been able to get an answer from Leica Camera, so I figured

that someone who reads the Forum might have the solution to this

puzzle.

If you can, please help.

Many thans,

Al

Rich and Liz are the best! I've left my kids inheritance there, but I'm smiling. Great advice-a good place to rent and tryout new items.

First rate service and stock.

Happy image making,

Al

I would appreciate hearing your experiences and opinions. I am about

to purchase a second body (my first is an .85). I am leaning towards

the .58; I know that it's a matter of personal choice; but I would

like to avoid a "mistake".

Currently, my favorite 2 lens outfit consists of a 50mm 'lux which is

perfect with the .85 and the 28mm 'cron which I use with the external

viewfinder as the hood blocks too much of the built in finder. There

are times when I would choose to take just one body and one lens

based on the images I hope to capture. My one lens choice is often a

35 'lux ASPH, but it could be the 50 'lux.

So what have you determined? The .58's single frame viewfinder frame

for the 35 is a plus, but might I have difficulty focusing the

50 'lux at f1.4? I do use a 90 'Elmarit and a 135 APO on the .85,

but not as often as the 50.

Your thoughts, please.

Al

Henry,

I agree with Jay-use an external 28mm viewfinder. I prefer the Leica version and have found that it works like a charm with my 28 'cron.

It's far less expensive than a .58 MP and can be left on the body when you are not using your 28mm lens.

Give it a try.

Happy image making,

Al

Jack,

Had you decided to use Tri X and your 50mm 1.4, would it have been on an M7 or MP?

Just kidding! Thanks for provoking the exchange. I'm sure that it could have gone on for days.

Al

Henry,

There is nothing more accurate than, "Different strokes for different folks".

For years (like many M users) the 35 was my default lens. I used it for 80% of my images-especially while travelling.

So often, however, it was not wide enough and there wasn't space to back up.

Last year (just before a trip to Scotland) I rented a 28 'cron and haven't used the 35 since!

Coupled with the 50, it's a perfect 2 lens outfit for walking around.

I have a 135 to capture distance images. I can't remember when I used my 90 last-the 50 is fine for head and shoulder pictures.

I never tried the 28 Elmarit-the 'cron was so perfect.

Go for it and make beautiful images.

Al

John,

That's real sweet! Composition, texture-the works.

Any details on film, lens, etc.?

Al

Sandy,

Thanks for your 'prompting'. I've just followed through and agree that Photo.net is more than worth the contribution.

I'm looking forward to a lot more of your contributions and those of our fellow 'thread' readers.

Al

Sandy,

Thanks for your 'prompting'. I've just followed through and agree that Photo.net is more than worth the contribution.

I'm looking forward to a lot more of your contributions and those of our fellow 'thread' readers.

Al

Manu,

Great image! Your timing was perfect.

What camera, lens, film combo did you use?

Al

Sandy,

I really thought that I responded before-must have been a different thread!

I work in lower Manhattan (NYC), live on Long Island, have been trying my hand at image making for the past 55 years (I started when I was 12), have used a Leica M cameras and lenses for over twenty years, and although I once thought of photography as a profession I've been a consultant in Educational Research & Evaluation for thirty-six years. I'm a real amateur photographer (mostly travel and family). It continues to be a gas!

Al you're right-you are 45 it was my math head that mistakenly added the 10 years!

Either way, you've got many years of Leica images to look forward to.

Best,

Alan

It was his M3 in the photo. Hard to tell which lens was in use, but his favorite was the 50mm.

Alan

HCB is celebrating his 95th birthday prompting me to locate an image

I grabbed some 55 years ago at a meeting of ASMP. The group was

celebrating his work to-date and he showed his appreciation by

photgraphing the crowd. I caught the attached shot from a location

(on the floor) close to where he, Halsman, and several other 'greats'

were standing.

It's a poor scan from an old print, but it is a memorable image for

me. Anyone have others to share?

Happy image making.

Alan<div></div>

I agree with those who voted for #1. More dramatic and a better message.

Is there an adapter for that optic to fit my M7?

Best of luck,

Al

Well, I'm a New Yorker (work in NYC, but live on Long Island). I've been trying my hand at image making for 55 years, mostly as an amateur, although I actually earned a few dollars in photography during the late fifties-including a time as a Army photog using a 4x5 Speed Graphic. I finally made it to the world of Leica M about fifteen years ago. I earn my living working for a consulting firm, but gain my real enjoyment from family and travel photography.

It's amazing how many have responded to this thread from across the globe. Great idea Sandy.

Al

Todd,

You've posted a classic dilemma! What has worked for any of us may not be right for you. I used my 35 'cron as my only lens for years,but traded it eventually for a 'lux ASPH that I used for four more years and loved it.

The 28 'cron caught my eye and one of the forum members suggested that I rent before buying.

Rich Pinto (The Photo Village) was very helpful. I actually rented one and took it to Scotland for 2 weeks. It was a great move! I love the lens and bought it on my return (Rich didn't even charge me for the rental). Since then, I've used the 35 'lux only for low-light situations, preferring the field of view of the 28.

But that's me. You may be different. Try to rent both and make up your mind in practice, not by what someone else has done.

My 2 cents. I hope it's helpful.

Happy image making.

Al

Lutz,

Wonderful image! Leica should use it as a promotional piece; it's pushing me to my dealer.

Best,

Al

Karl,

Just one more opinion. I lean towards your last solution; the 28 'cron. It's a great lens! I do have a 35 'lux ASPH, however it hasn't left my bag (except for the lowest light situations) since a got my 28 'cron. Yes the shade is a monster and it's hard to use the built-in frames (I use the auxillary 28 viewfinder), but it really covers a lot of ground. I've matched it with the 50 'cron and the 90 Elmarit.

A good kit with the 90 being used least. Anyway, my thoughts.

Happy image making.

Al

Tony and others (especially Ed and others at LHSA),

I too, wait endlessly for my copy of Viewfinder-I haven't received my recent copy yet; have written to the office and received an email saying that it "was in the mail".

Yes, it is a drag, BUT IT'S WORTH IT!

It's still the best publication available devoted to us crazies.

Maybe an option for first class mail (at a fee) is the answer.

Enjoy reading and imagemaking.

AL

Thomas,

I just purchased the same finder for use with my new 135. Are you having any difficulty with flare? Unless I'm really up tight with the finder, I am.

I need to use it in the field now-hope that it works as planned. It is a big improvement over the the tunnel-size frames in my .72.

Al

Budi,

My experiences are similar to Dr. Knapps'. I first used my M7 0.72 last summer on a trip to Scotland. My primary lenses were the 28 'cron and the 50 'cron. The camera worked flawlessly as it has since. Although I used print film, I too realized that there were times (on the beach in Harris, for example) when simply using AE would not work well. Here the exposure lock with compensation was the answer.

I've just added the M7 0.85 and will use it with my 90 Elmarit and 135.

Happy image making.

Al

Todd,

It's really the Leica Microfibre cloth that's important, not the body or the lens!

Seriously, while both the body and the lens make their own 'contribution' to the final image and neither is as important as the photographer's eye, I suspect that it is quite difficult to untangle the interaction between the two parts of the input in the equation.

It is clear that if the the body did not hold the film perfectly flat and expose it for the determined amount of time the design qualities (and lack of desgin imperfections) of the lens would never come into play.

Of course, the reverse is also true. A poor performing lens will provide a less than desirable image even using the best body.

QED: You need both the body and the lens to be the best possible.

We all know, however that the best lens fitted to the best camera in the hands of a person without a clue or vision is a waste.

Any way, IMHO, the three legs of the tripod-camera, lens, and the photographer's eye need to be in synch or the result will not be satisfying.

Best,

Al