mark_a._waidelich

All, this was very thoroughly covered on the LUG, where Erwin was

completely trashed. This seems to me a redundant argument. No one is

making you read his material, reports, tests or opinions (but you

still do).

<p>

If you don't like Erwin Puts, read elsewhere. There are lots of

opinions out there, your's included. Both have some merit. Both

deserve respect.

I spent considerable time at my local Leica dealer viewing,

focusing, and re-focusing both .72 and .85 models and ended up

purchasing the 0.85. The magnification seemed to make the

difference. I purchased the 50mm Summilx with plans to to add a 75mm

or 90mm.

<p>

Obviously, the 35mm is the smallest lens that shows VF framelines,

but IMHO, still useable. By the way, I wear glasses and at least in

the showroom, I didn't find it difficult to compose a shot. (I use

the technique of centering for focus and then re-composing.) Again,

the magnification was improved over the 0.72.

<p>

Best wishes on your decision.

<p>

--Mark Waidelich

Brooke,

<p>

I just purchased the Summilux about a week ago and was very

pleasantly surprised at the results from my first roll. And the

extra stop is great. No problems indoors with this lens.

<p>

I also noted the stiff focusing, but I'm sure that's just the way

the "new" lens works.

<p>

Good luck on whatever you do.

<p>

Regards,

<p>

--Mark

I have used both glass and plastic and prefer glass. However, glass

breaks and that's just what happened to my Zeiss lenses--dropped

onto my concrete garage floor. Zeiss lenses are expensive, about

$350 for the lenses. IR for these lenses is 1.8, very high for

glasses, but the result is that they are very thin. (I had to sign a

safety waiver to purchase them.)

<p>

I have Titanium Calvin Kline frames for another $300, or $650 total,

not including the exam.

<p>

You have to be pretty careful with these under virtually all

circumstances. But it's worth it. My current pair, plastic, made by

Hoya (IR=1.71) are lighter and nearly as thin and cheaper, but not

by much ($300). However, I sometimes feel like I'm looking through a

thin layer of milk. It's a lot like flare. I'm not sure if it's the

lens itself or the coating, but they are not as clear as Zeiss.

<p>

By the way, I had my Zeiss for over two years without an incident.

But it only takes once.

<p>

I had to consider what would have happened if my glasses broke while

I was wearing them. My eyes and ears are precious. My eyes for

photography and my ears for music. They are both critical for the

hobbies I dearly love. I buy the best glasses I can for my eyes and

keep safety in mind. I buy the most pleasing sounding music systems

for my ears and avoid excessive noise and distortion.

<p>

Regards,

All,

<p>

What is the likelihood that at Leica market and electronic and

manual version of the M series, much in keeping with the marketing

strategy of Hasselblad's 200, 500 and 900 series. And assuming that

scenario, would the value of the M6 remain fairly constant?

<p>

Regards,

<p>

--mark

Jeff,

<p>

I think I understand your response, but would you elucidate just a

bit? If I understand it, the variable (film speed) would not change

the fixed DOF of the lens, only the speed with which you could shoot

your subject. Is this assumption correct?

<p>

Also, I appreciate the effects of DOF when emphasizing a subject,

since the background subject add too to the atmosphere without

taking away the focus of the subject.

<p>

Thanks,

<p>

--Mark

All,

<p>

Thank you all for your responses! What a great group!

<p>

Gleaning from your responses I noted the following:

<p>

1. Acclimate to a single lense

<p>

I like this suggestion from Godfrey and David Enzel. They touch on a

point that maturity often comes through experience. (And I find

myself sometimes more creative when pushed by 'perceived'

limitations.) The reason for a fast lens has much to do with the

fact that many of our family get togethers, are indoors where light

is a bit more of a challenge. (We live in the Pacific Northwest and

recently experienced 34-straight days of rain!) And it sounds like I

should consider the 50mm f/2 Summicron as an alternative. I could

apply the savings to a 35mm (Ken Shipman).

<p>

2. 50-90mm lenses combinations are popular

<p>

This sounds like a popular combination. However, the 90mm sounds

like it might get stuck on my 0.85 body(!) and I will eventually

need a 0.58 or the 0.72 body. (David Collingridge) And that is

something that I was thinking might happen!

<p>

3. Lots of wide angle considerations

<p>

As Chris Chen points out, going wide, ". . . get(s) involved with

your subject/into the action . . ." and I find I actually do that

quite often, especially at family gatherings. But it's also

sometimes intrusive and my presence can change the dynamics. I find

a more natural, relaxed composition just outside the main area of

interation--where I am no longer in sensory contact with the group.

<p>

At this point, I am inclinded toward a single lens--either the

1.4/50mm Summilux-M or the 2.0/50mm Summicron. I want to understand

how a normal focal length fits my personal approach.

<p>

So, here's a follow-up question--What real-world differences between

the 1.4 and the 2.0 would I encounter?

<p>

Thanks again to everyone who contributed!

<p>

--Mark

<p>

P.S. Re Chris Chen's comment re the "tube turntable," it took

forever for the power supply tubes to warm up! Ha! Ha! :) My front

end gear was all Quicksilver.

Hi all, I'm new to this forum, but have been following it for quite a while.

<p>

I recently took advantage of Leica's rebate offer and bought a M6 series body. It was more important to me to have the USA warranty on the body than the lens. I am planning to purchase two lenses.

<p>

My experience with photography was built around my brother, a photojournalist with over 30 years experience. We spent literally hundreds of hours together in his homemade darkroom as well field work and on campus in his early days at college. (I was his portrait subject looking down the bellows of a very large camera!) Now that I look back on it, I was his sherpa, side-kick and friend.

<p>

Anyway, his experience with his Leica system was very positive and two years ago, not being able to justify the M system, I purchased a Minilux Zoom, Black Titanium. My photos rivaled many of my friends SLR systems and I believe the knowledge transfer of many hours in the dark room, evaluating light conditions and shuffling camera parts between the camera bag and my brother paid off. But that was many year ago.

<p>

My experience with the Minilux while positive, was also frustrating. The camera limits the photographer through extensive automation. I was always playing with the exposure value. My minds eye had an effect in mind, but the camera had it's own. Thus the purchase of the M6.

<p>

The M6, for me, will be a photographic tool. It will be used, a lot. It will be well cared for, but I plan to run hundreds of rolls of film through it with several purposes in mind: family pictures, candids, some landscape and lots of travel.

<p>

(By the way, I sold a very high-end, all tube music system so that I could afford the M system.)

<p>

So, I would like your opinions on which lenses to purchase. My initial leanings are towards the 1.4/50mm Summilux-M and APO-Summicron-M 1:2/90 ASPH. Based on my description of use above, are there other options that I should consider?

<p>

By the way, I purchased the .85 HM viewfinder body.

<p>

--Mark