nasmformyzombie

My question is this: do the M4 and M6 use the same sync plugs?

I know the sync plugs for M2 and M3 are not interchangable with the M6. What

about M4 and M6 plugs?

KB Camera has information on several versions of the Leica M Summilux lens <A href="http://www.leicagallery.com/summilux50mm.htm

"><b>here</b>.</A> According to KB, none of the pre-ASPH versions has the .7 meter close focus. Interestingly, the new Zeiss ZM 50mm f1.5 Sonnar has a minimum focus distance of .9 meter. Info on the Zeiss is <A href="http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b58b9/Contents-Frame/efadab346a2cb77dc12571880041b10c

"><b>here</b>.</A> If it's any consolation, the Zeiss is quite a bit cheaper than the new ASPH 'Lux.

Ben, the stupidity of your comment is exceeded only by its inappropriateness in this forum.

Stephen Gandy reports on his website that a two new Voigtlander cameras, the R4M

and R4A, with built in parallax projected framelines for 21, 25, 28, 35, and

50mm lenses will be available in April, 2007. Gandy's report and photos of the

R4M are

<A href="http://www.cameraquest.com/voigt4m4aintro.htm"><b>here</b>.</A>

The Canon 50mm f1.5 is a wonderful lens (as others have mentioned, a clone of the Zeiss Sonnar). The f1.5 Sonnar "signature" is very much a portrait oriented lens, sharper in the center, with very portrait flattering edge falloff and creamy bokeh. IMHO, the Sonnar clone is a better portrait lens than any of the 50mm Leicas.

Central California<div></div>

I am a hobbyist. $5000 for a camera? Never.

When in doubt, crop.<div></div>

With the imminent release of the first Leica all digital SLR, the Digilux3, I'm

curious who among the Leica rangefinder faithful own and use a digital SLR, or

plan to purchase one in the near future.

It seems Zeiss has removed the links on its web site to its newest lenses for

the M system, the 18mm f4 and 21mm f4.5. <a

href="http://camera-info.com/Zeiss/New_Zeiss_lenses_for_Nikon_Hasselblad_and_Zeiss_Ikon/_Leica_M.html">Here</a>

is a web site with info on these and several other new lenses from Zeiss.

Am I the only one who has a problem with the links? I've tried them multiple times with no success. Also, navigating to the Zeiss home page, and then to photo products, I see no info whatsoever referencing new ZM lenses 18mm f4, or 21mm f4.5.

I'm not saying the ZM 25mm will or will not work on the CLE, I'm only pointing out the protruding rear element on the ZM 25. I don't believe that the CLE has the same rear element clearance as an M camera---I could be wrong. Here's a photo of a Canon 25mm LTM lens I used on a CLE (both pieces were subsequently sold). Note no protruding rear element on the Canon.<div></div>

I'm not saying the ZM 25mm will or will not work on the CLE, I'm only pointing out the protruding rear element on the ZM 25. I don't believe that the CLE has the same rear element clearance as an M camera---I could be wrong. Here's a photo of a Canon 25mm LTM lens I used on a CLE (both pieces subsequently sold). Note no protruding rear element on the Canon.<div></div>

Are you guys certain about the ZM 25mm on a CLE? Take a look at the rear element on the ZM 25.<div></div>

Back to Leica topic: Did Leica aficionado Eisenstaedt take this photo of Loren on the cover of Life magazine?<div></div>

<i> Vinay Patel , sep 12, 2006; 04:27 p.m.<br>

"On the flip side, you can buy a Nikon d80 with 11 mgpx sensor for $950."<br>

And you can buy an n80 for $350. That's a 170% premium over a comparable film camera. 170% of an M7 is $5950. The M8 is still not priced unreasonably. Maybe you'd like to compare the M8 to the Canon A640 at $375? After all, it's also 10mp, and we all know that's the most important comparison criterion :-)</I><br><br>Vinay, the problem with your M8 price logic is your baseline is too high. The FILM cameras M7/MP are absurdly priced at $3500. If the MP/M7 were more reasonably priced at say $1800-$2000 (still very high IMHO) a $5000 digital M8 would represent a considerable price premium.

<i>Tony Polson Photo.net Patron, sep 02, 2006; 04:17 p.m.

...In terms of quality, the Zeiss Ikon is not a Zeiss product made in Japan. Think of it as a slightly improved Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa R2A/R3A with a better viewfinder and you will be much closer to the mark. The Zeiss Ikon is a very different proposition to a Kyocera Contax camera. The Contax products made by Kyocera in Japan were top quality products made to Carl Zeiss standards from start to finish and in every detail. </i><br<br>More utter drivel. Zeiss had MORE input on the development and creation of the Ikon camera than ANY Contax camera produced by Kyocera. The Ikon is a new camera from the ground up, not a re-badged or re-worked anything. I am a long time user of Contax cameras (since the late 1970's) and have professional contacts in the industry who worked for Kyocera. The real difference is in perception, where Kyocera/Contax were considered producers of mostly a high-end niche product, where Cosina's reputation was built on producing inexpensive entry level products manufactured for the likes of Nikon, Olympus and Pentax.

Monkey, would that detail be breasts or a joint? :>)<div></div>

I too prefer the original.

Bill, right on! And it has been just the last few years that Leica has gone completely insane: when it debuted in 2002, a new M7 was somewhere bewteen $2000 and $2400 (I'm sure there's Leicanuts who will recall this price with more accuracy than I). Only <i>four</i> years later (and with considerable improvments and price reductions with digital cameras) that same M7 camera is $3500. INSANITY.

I'm with Bill. The M7 is a nice machine, I bought a new gray market body a few years ago for a little over $2000. But $3500? If you're into digital or film, regardless, spending $3500 on a 35mm film camera seems more than a tad daft to me. I'm not liking Leica prices right now!

Matthew, there is no valid reason to believe for an instant that any Bessa is better built than an Ikon. This is just ludicrous. The Ikon is built with manufacturing tolerances established and managed by Zeiss. What is Zeiss? How about camera and cine lenses with a world class reputation; eyeglasses; industrial metrology; microscopy, ophthalmology; planetariums; semiconductors; spectral sensors; sports optics and surgical products. in the 1970's, Zeiss developed a strategy for partnering on the manufacture of certain products in Asia, first with Yashica (then purchased by Kyocera), and more recently with Cosina. (Leica's questionable strategy of maintaining all manufacture has brought it to the brink of bankruptcy, now majority owned by a luxury purse maker). The all Cosina Bessa-anything is a nice but less expensive consumer product with marginal quality control. How drivel like "a Bessa is better built than an Ikon" can even find the light of day is just something I ascribe to complete ignorance of any facts.

Saw this photo of the new M Tri-Elmar 16/18/21 with finder on the Rangefinder forum.<div></div>

The Ikon SW is an Ikon without a rangefinder and with a spare top deck shoe mount. Period. Overpriced? IMHO, yes. But not nearly as overpriced as a new Leica MP/M7 at $3500.