djl251

<p>In spite of its' popularity- I just can't get used to the 35mm. I gotta use the 50.</p>

<p>Try replacing the lenscap before advancing the film after shooting. That should eliminate the problem.</p>

<p>Stuff I've just sold.</p><div></div>

<p>I'd keep the M4 over the M6. I sold my m6. Was not well made by comparison.</p>

<p>I bought a BGN Canon 50mm 0.95 lens from KEH about 8 years ago for 300 and recently sold it for 1000. Pretty good value. Plus they have a return policy (try that on e bay). Too beat up for you? Hey send it back.</p>

<p>This forum used to be really amazing back in the days before the street shooters and the "no-words" contributions were split off. Guys like Jay, Al Kaplan, Dennis C, Mike Dixon, and many others made this forum required daily reading. Yeah it often would degenerate into a Michael Vick style dogfight but it was sure fun. Yet for a forum to survive and still tolerate debate, moderation is essential. I wouldn't have the time or brains to do it. I'm glad someone does.</p>

Well Jeff, here are my thoughts. If you want Leica then go M6. Any digital slr will run circles around Leica with auto focus,

auto exposure, multi shot and other wizz-bang stuff. I like to use the M6 with the battery out, because the blinky lights are

distracting. For that matter I prefer using the M3 with a 50 or an M2 with a 35 because of the better build quality of the older

models. But given the choice of M6 or M7 I would pick M6. As for the lenses, with faster modern films I see no need to

go for f1.4 over f2.0, unless you are interested in the OOF of wide open. I have a ton of lenses, but If I had to choose just

one, it would be the 40mm summicron f2.0. Funny, my pictures were better back when I had fewer lenses.

Camera leather is nice. But don't expect real fast service. Do it your self. Get wild. Gaudy is better.

The Summitar is a great lens and well worth mounting on your M3.

You could reasonably expect it to do the opposite of red - lighten the sky and shadows. I don't know about fog - blue is not a filter that I have found particularly helpful. But I see where you are coming from, if infrared penetrates fog then blue would do the opposite. Sometimes you have to do the experiment yourself.

40 Years ago I got some great shots with my Canon rangefinder, so I stuck with the brand with EOS.

Good for you Alex - Nice job.

Well that's like asking " Is it hard to play the clarinet pretty good?" The answer is " It

depends." Same with pictures. I have that same lens as well as the Canon 100/2. If you are

going to shoot portraits with it and you have it on a tripod you're going to get a lot of pics in

focus. If you are trying to shoot sports you're going to have a lot out of focus. As you use it

you'll get better. The real question is if you will like the image it records. In my experience

it's pretty average. I like the ELMAR-C 90/4 better by quite a bit. Like to know what you are

going to use it for, that would help. But if you want to use that lens on that camera - hey go

for it!

You probably have a separation in the beam splitter in your rangefinder. As someone stated, it is an expensive repair. You could use it with a wide lens and just zone focus. If you send it back, don't count on seeing your camera or your money again. You bought it, it's yours. Better to ues it as is or send it for a CLA if you can stomach spending as much to fix it as you did to buy it.

I have an M6, M3 and M2. The build quality of the M6 is just not there.

Sell it.

It's an antique; it's not supposed to be easy to use.

I don't bother loading my HIE in the dark. I found that indoor light is fine and outdoor shade

is also fine. Loading in direct sunlight might cause problems. It is just not necessary to cut

things in the dark.

Here's my opinion. The Summitar is one of my favorite lenses. It produces a beautiful

image with a unique 3D quality I had not noticed in other lenses. Prior to the Summitar I

thought nothing could beat the Canon 50/1.4. Now it looks pretty average by

comparison. I also have the Canon 50/0.95, Summilux 50/1.4 and Summicron 50/2. The

Summicron may be sharper but not faster and offers some ergonomic improvements. But

so what. The image from the Summitar is hard to beat.

 

Want to use a F1.4 or the 0.95? Better get a tripod. And bracket your focus distance. The

depth of field is so narrow you'll be tossing a lot of blurry negs. That may be a bit

extreme, but you can't just shoot fast with a fast lens and expect "sharp" results.

 

Since you are using B&W film and have the option of pushing your speed or using fast film,

what is the point of having a fast lens? Unless you are after the DOF or OOF characteristics

of a faster lens I don't see the point.

Now that's SCARY!

I have both M6 and M3 so I think I can respond with some knowlege. Buy the M3. The

plastic parts on the M6 will break and drive you crazy. The blinky lights in the M6 start to

get annoying so I just took the batteries out. My M6 ate a roll of kodachrome. The

counter doesn't work. I am not impressed with the quality of the M6.

 

The M3 is smooth and nice. I like the magnification of the finder for 50mm and 90mm.

For 35mm I like the M2 (which I also have and like very much).

 

I hardly use the M6 any more - I really should sell it.

Spend US$3000 on a leica film camera (M or R) or US$3000 on a digtal camera? No i would

not do neither.

Hi Sandy:

 

I have used the IIIc and the Canon 7 extensively as well as their respective lenses (Canon

50/1.4, 50/0.95,85/1.8,100/2,135/3.5 and 35/2 and the Leica Summitar 50/2). The

Canon is nice because it has a meter and is easier to load. Unfortunately, mine is in a box

and in pieces; it just didn't have the build quality.

 

The Leica IIIc is built like a tank. Today's user would call the camera fussy. Those of us

that are used to fast foods and microwave popcorn and auto-everything cameras would

not enjoy the little knobs and dials of the IIIc. But in its day, the IIIc provided its user with

a fine tactile array of knurled knobs, levers, dials and sliding controls that would shame a

Fisher-Price playset.

 

As far as the lenses go, the Summitar 50/2 has the most pleasing image quality of any of

the screw mount lenses that I have tried. It's most unique quality is its ability to render

the 3-d character to the image plane (obvioulsy it's only 2-d).

 

The camera and its collapsible lens is easily pocketable - the IIIc is less high than the M3

and significantly more compact. You can take it with you all the time.

 

Some assorted pluses and minuses- The iiic view finder is pretty bad if you are used to an

M3 - M7. You can get a nice External brightline finder (SBOOI 50mm finder, SBLOO

35mm finder). These will really improve you visual experience, and you will have one

more mechanical gizmo the play with. It's really amazing how they project those white

framelines into thin air.

 

Also - with the lack of an exposure meter, it will be necessary to engage the human brain,

learn "sunny 16" , learn some exposure rules, develop a sixth sence for exposure. That's

not all that bad.

 

The IIIc has a little quirk - the frame separation is too small - meaning that your pictures

are too close together the fit some scanner film holders and are difficult to cut between if

you are developing your own film. Guess they wanted to save film.

 

So Sandy - I think you would be happy with the IIIc and you choice of screw mount lenses.

Someone will say that the brightline finders are "absurdly expensive" What do they know -

it's your money. Hey - good talking to you!

Frankly, my taste prefers B&W so I am inclined to agree with Josiah. But when the photo

clearly calls for color, like that Ansel Adams photo of the rainbow in the waterfall, and it's

done in B&W, well then I just don't get it. Maybe I'm just stupid.

Well it may be a Leica but it's still a tiny scrap of film your putting your masterpiece on. So I

have to wonder really why all the fuss. I mean it's like arguing who's 4 inch woofers pack the

punch. Yeah I like my Leica's (I have quite a few of them). The lenses are pretty nice. And it's

a handy little package. But "Mystique" escapes me.