henry_ting2

I noticed a variation in how the leatherette is adhere to the body. Since the body have screw holes, the earlier version's leatherette have dimples (indentation) on where the leatherette covers the holes. Also some of the earlier versions have "orange peel" surface on the paint job, but the later ones are smoother.

All very good pictures, but you don't need a Leica for it.

Ditto Kelly.

Normal polishing WILL change the spherical shape. In order to conform with the original sphere size, a measurement has to be made, then a mold custom made for it. Then and only then a lens after polishing on an orbital machine with the custom mould, will it retain all the correct perimeters, except one, where the thickness of the original glass is changed.

My advice to Joe is to forget it. That lens is not worth the cost and effort. It is neither a collectible (due to the condition) nor a user for that matter.

"How does one know or estimate the amount of distortion at various distances? Can the external viewfinders help? Or is it only through wasted film and experience that one acquires this knowledge? "

 

Wai-Leong Lee, consider the Leica M viewfinder a huge improvement on a MF waist-level VF where the image flips left to right. Even our eyeballs see things upside down and left to right and its only through our brains our sensories correct that. Now surely you can train your sight just as the wide-angle sees it.

Now that you mentioned, I just noticed that I lost my icon. Thanks for the reminder.

Yes Gabriele, adjusting the M6 shutter dial is not a one-finger affair. The M7 and MP shutters require less torque and while you still cannot ease it back and forth, but at least its not as tight as the M6 classic.

Jack, get both pre and aft asph. Then you're covered.

Thanks Jay. A real comprehensive response and I appreciate it.

Depends on your priority. Whether you want to vest more time into your hobby or your baby is entirely your choice. "The child arrive too early ?" I don't think its their choice entirely.

Can someone suggest and recommend a "good/accurate" shutter testor ?

Thanks

I agree with Daniel. The MP stock rewind knob is a real "PITA". I stopped using the MP because of that....AND I'm not a pro. Imagine trying to reload film in the heat of shooting an event.

Don't try it yourself Martin, untless you have the proper tools and technique. The focussing arm on the CL is quite fragile.

She uses black wax to seal the top plate. The technique is melting the wax and let it seep into the seams. Some people like it and some don't. I found it serves a purpose as well as preventing the top plate from seizing on future service.

Paul, enjoy your Leica. Can Leica take better pictures ?

You bet cha !!! Just see how happy you are now and your result is a direct reflection of how you feel as a photog.

Aside from the left/right trianguler leds, the TTL meter have a center red dot and it lights up when the exposure is correct. The classic have only the left/right lights and if both a lit up, the exposure is correct. Also the TTL meter is more sensitive.

Beau, you just got my vote of winning the "MOAB" (Mother of all Bokeh).

"$200+ for a 12504?! I gave one away, with UV. Sure, it was a little bent; it was hit by a motorcycle in Pattaya"

 

Stephen, that is one good reason why use your Leica, but take good care of it. Yes a 12504 hood could fetch you $200+. A $3K lens could potentially fetch you a lot more, depending on the buyer that wants it. Even old Nikon rangefinders are demanding astronomical amounts. Buying, using and collecting Leicas could be fun, if you know what you are doing. It has nothing to do with the conscensus of "commonsense", it never does in the world of collectors. I started this thread, and ironically people thought I'm showing off having $$$$$ to blow away on Leicas. BTW, that $200+ 12504 hood was sold by me, and yes personally I wouldn't even buy a $50 hood for practical reasons.

For those who own Leica because they need it for practical reasons, look at the price of this hood that people are willing to pay :

 

<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3824646013"> click here</a>

 

In contrast, I just bought a mint used Rollie 35 for $150.00.

Because Evans, I'm not looking for advise, nor suggestions, but rather comments in seeing how we all get hangups and hypocritically trying to justify ownership of Leicas for practical reasons -- which to me is the paradox. I don't have a problem because I concluded that my Leica association is because I like Leicas.

There are 2 kinds of dry cabinet. Namely those with dessicants and the other that work by the "Peltier" principle.

 

* Dessicant ones have drying agents and the on-going heating/drying of renewing the agents for effective moisture absorption are prone to breakdowns and have limited life-cycles. While they are effective for the first several years, but their effectiveness diminshes with age.

* Peltier dry cabinets does not use dessicants. They use the cooling condensation to absorb moisture. While in U.S. I don't need it, but since I have another business location (S.E. Asia), I use the peltier dry cabinet for the gears I stock over there. Peltier ones are more expensive and since they don't have complicated heating mechanism, they tend to last la lot longer.

"Nobody here is going to give you $4000 knowing that you paid $3000"

 

Boris, I wouldn't say so, not if you know a thing or two about Leicas.

Have you checked market price when it first came out and the price of a current used "beatup" black paint M3 ?

Thank you all for the comments.

I'm not really looking for suggestions, but rather the comments and conclusions I got seems to be a big contradiction for Leica users.

 

As Al stated, the average Leica user enlarge their prints to mostly 8*11, and very rarely go beyond that. I myself included that I rarely attempt to blow up to the size that would realize the full potential and justification of a premier Leica lens.

 

The question beholds, then why do we all gather here talking about Leicas, while other equipments costing 1/5 of the Leica price, could equally compare with Leica's picture quality.

 

I find those who distinct themselves between needing a Leica, and actually using it in practical means, are hypocrites. We all LIKE Leicas, and while a lot of comments takes the path of commonsense, but ironically when one confronts the truth, there really is no justification for spending all that money on Leica for what we use it for.

 

Let me repeat, I LIKE Leicas and I'm sure the majority of the folks here agree with me. "Commonsense" is the least justification for even owning a Leica and Solms knows about it. Ironically there are those that even call other Leica owners "wankers" and "fondlers".

 

It is a paradox and hypocritcal for those that really think they justify owning Leicas for practical reasons.

You guys are really low-balling Leica used pricing. A new 35mm Lux asph lists for $2695 and this limited first edition glass is not worth $3K ? Now I'm going to get it, AND use it, and then turn around selling it for a profit. Somehow that all seems illogical to some.

Not the same one Trevor.

My reference is to the 1st version "aspherical", not the current "asph" version.

I have an opportunity to purchase a "like new" 35mm

Summilux "Aspherical" with original box and papers for $3K. Comments ?