jacques_balthazar1

February 8, 2003

Get a 28mm for your M, keep the teles on the Nikon and you have the best possible system. Ok maybe add a 2nd hand 24mm nikkor for those SLR moments when you really do not want 2 bodies in the bag.

February 8, 2003

The sling is undoubtly the most ingenious and useful M add-on around. I cannot imagine using an M without it. I now have problems with most SLRs, where wrist/hand band would be so welcome but are almost never available. Lutz ?

July 3, 2002

I use the 180 f2.8 apo-elmarit, and never touched the 80-200 zoom, so mine are one sided considerations.

The 180 is the absolutely most gorgeous lens I have ever used, all systems and all focal lengths considered. It is gorgeous in a mechanical design sense (internal focusing, super smooth focusing ring, "perfect" weight and balance on a R8, convenient size) and in an optical sense (absolutely brilliant imaging performance from f2.8, nice close focus ability).

The f2.8 capability (and performance at that aperture) is, for me, the decisive factor when comparing to the f4 zoom. That 1 stop gain facilitates precise focusing and is irreplaceable in so many real world situations.

Higher in the Leica R range, both the f2.8 zoom and the f2 180mm are hardly manageable for handheld photography and certainly uncomfortable to carry around.

June 17, 2002

Reading of the FS posts gives to cynics such as myself ever renewed reasons to believe half of us are compulsive hardware fetishists, with too much time and money at hand, rather than photographers. With the FS ads out of the Leica forum, it will be harder to keep track of the sheer lunacy. I vote to keep them in... ;-)

May 31, 2002

R8 is not bulky. It looks bulky. R8 is not big and is not heavy,

compared to high end offers from other manufacturers. It becomes

*almost* as big and heavy when you add the optional motordrive.

Enough of that legend.

R4/5/6 and even 7 are smallish, but they have no "grip". They handle

like middle of the road Eighties SLRs (which they basically are). If

you want to hand hold them securely with lenses heavier than basic

35/50 'crons, you will want to add the large and clunky motordrive,

providing that needed "grip".

OTOH R8 handles like a dream, with or without motor, thanks to a very

ergonomic design. Perfect viewfinder, perfect and simple "command and

control" center, great flashmeter capability, etc, etc. Try one with

a 19 or a 180 elmarit or a 80 'lux, and you'll get that illumination!

It's only failure, from my point of view, is the necessity to use

proprietary battery back with motordrive, while, stupidly, the

smaller winder lacks the vertical grip/handstrap capabilities of the

motordrive.

If size matters for you, and you want small, go M.

May 29, 2002

Eliot,

Dare i say that may be true for M6 users, but I'm not too sure the

number of M7 users that regularly visit Leica fora is sufficiently

high to allow discarding "a few" converging reports of problems...

Let's say we have around 15 M7 users on this forum right now (?). If

5 report problems, that is a high proportion !

May 27, 2002

Greg,

I use the 75 'lux, and have been pouring out extatic comments in many

previous threads, so will avoid repeating here.

I often ask myself the same question as you regarding the Noctilux,

and have periodically felt very tempted by the adventure of replacing

my 50 'cron by that mythical monster.

What stops me, beyond size/weight (the 75 is already adding that much

un-M cumbersomeness to the setup), is the 1m minimum focus limit.

That is just too far for a 50mm lens, even on a M, especially for the

usage I would make of the Nocti (interior shots in cafes, bars and

other smoky places...).

I think the intimacy you are looking for is better served by the

other 50mm lenses in the stable. And there is here a clear case in

favour of latest generation 50 'lux, combining nice differential

focus capability, low light flexibility and compact footprint.

But if it is a case of carrying more than one lens around, and as you

have already fallen for the 35 'lux asph, I feel money would be

better invested in the 75 alone rather than in the Noctilux or in

both. I bet you will be tempted to leave the 90, and even the 135, at

home once you carry the 75 around...

May 24, 2002

Salut René,

The current 180mm apo-elmarit typifies the unfortunately overused

concept of "awesome".

It is a beautiful piece of hardware, with an exquisit mechanical

construction. Size, weight and general ergonomy are flawless.

Contrary to its predecessors, it focuses internally. This means that

the length of the lens, and thus the balance of the camera-lens

combo, remains constant during focusing. That is a useful feature

with that type of focal length. The R8 w/winder or motor is the

perfect companion for that lens, offering a marvelous handholdable

combination (if you are not lazy.

Even more useful is the wonderful lightness of the focusing ring. You

can focus (and that includes follow focus in action pics) with the

index of your left hand, while the rest of your hand supports the

camera. It shows just enough resistance not to defocus by accident

(though some users feel there should be even more resistance built

in. not my feeling).

Compared to the old f3.4, it focuses much closer, which is a precious

asset in real life.

And when you get the slides processed, you see the real benefit of

using what is considered in all credible benchmarks as the absolute

best short tele in the market today (with the f2 'cron): quality is

perfect at f2.8, and closing down the lens is only useful if you want

to extend depth of field.

Only down side: it is not compatible with the 1.4x converter.

Try it, buy it, and enjoy !

May 22, 2002

All R or M mountable lenses (except maybe a few SM oldies) will

be "too" sharp for the audience you mention, unless you shoot wide

open (not necessarily the best option for that application).

People often refer to older 90 'crons at f2, but the DoF at f2, at

portrait distances, is not deep enough for traditional flattering

portraiture: only some parts of the face will be in focus, which may

be interesting, but will rarely be seen as successful by the

viewer/model. And at f5.6, the 'crons of yore are just as unforgiving

as today's macro-elmarit....

Softars are the way to go to manage the issue in a crude but coherent

way.

Beyond the M/R ranges however, some suppliers offer interesting soft

lenses. Through experience, I would recommend the Pentax 85mm f2.2 SF

(older MF K mount), and the current Minolta 100mm f2.8 SF. The latter

manages the degree of softness independently of the aperture

(allowing freedom for DoF management, very nice between settings nr 1

and 2), while the soft effect on the Pentax is directly linked to the

chosen aperture (too strong wide open but very nice at f4).

All that said, work on the light rather than softening the lens seems

the best way to go: large diffusers, soft boxes, overcast days,

Portra NC will do the job without the outdated SF glow effects...

May 22, 2002

Jack did it with the Canon. I recently did similarly unscientific

quick 'n dirty comparisons with Minolta Dynax. And found similar

results to those "revealed" by Jack with el cheapo 50mm f1.7

(compared to mythical 'cron) and 85mm f1.4 (compared to mythical M

75 'lux). Also compared old 90mm Tamron f2.5 (adaptall mount 2nd

version) to my super-mythical 100 macro-elmarit. The latter produced

similarly high quality from f4 down, but the two first produced

results that were stickingly similar at all apertures. So what?

Others have played those games for years with Nikkors, Olympus or

Pentax, with identical "epiphanies".

Those comparisons in so-called "real life" circumstances evidently do

not test the lenses to their limit. The shooting protocol (handheld,

precipitated sessions, unchallenging light, etc) and the lack of

benchmark measurement of key optical differentiators (distortion,

vignetting, flare resistance, etc) are equalisers that drag the

Leicas down to the level of the very capable tools produced elsewhere.

The differentiator, for me, is the intimate knowledge, produced by

personal experience and by reference to credible optical testing

benchmarks, that, whatever the circumstances, any picture failure

with a Leica will be unrelated to optical defects. If your (recent)

Leica glass flares on you, distorts on you or simply produces images

that lack in ooomph, you know that you would not have fared better

with anyone else. This unchallenged confidence, especially at the

wider apertures, is what you pay for when you buy Leica glass.

But, for me, the reason to buy Leica goes even beyond that, and

relates to the unique binding experience provided by Leica, that

connects me as a user to the photographic process. None of the other

contemporary lines of 35mm hardware provide me with a similar user

experience. This relates to ergonomy, construction, choice of

materials, tactile feedback, and other non measurable items.

On that playing field, Canon, Minolta and the others, even when they

do produce high end sturdy bodies and nicely finished pro lenses,

simply do not compete. For me.

May 21, 2002

reason + passion: keep your M outfit limited to 2 lenses. They should

be "different" enough as to justify the annoyance of carrying both

and swap them in the course of a shooting session. Therefore I do not

think the 35+50 idea is the right solution, for me.

I favour the 0.72 compromise, as you do, and see two "perfect sets":

28 'cron + 50 'lux or

35' lux asph and 75 'lux.

The first set offers that compacity that attracts so many users to

the M system, and I would say quite enough versatility. The 28 'cron

justifies itself entirely in this perspective, by adding some welcome

drama and environment to your images.

The second set is more idiosyncratic, 'cause the 75 is such an exotic

piece and supposes a somewhat skewed love affair to endure weight and

size .

I use a 35 'cron + 75 'lux (soooo beautiful!) as provisional couple.

Would be yet happier when I will be capable of trading the 35 'cron

for the 35 'lux. I find 35mm more versatile than 28mm because it

allows close quarter shooting of people with minimal perspective side

effects on face features. The 28mm is harder to use in daly life.

May 15, 2002

Niels,

I fully relate to your interrogation. I also think the pleasure

element is a key. But I think the main key is the unique set of

functionality of the M: size, simplicity, reliability, discretion,

unchallenged ease of use with crucial wide angles (28 and 35) and low

light capabilities, married with the knowledge that optical issues

will never be the point of failure in any assignement.

People who do not need that unique set of functionality may or may

not still relate to the pleasure element, but will be less liable to

do so. If you do not really care about size, noise, ease of manual

control, available light, etc, why spend the bucks ?

That is why, IMHO, the R does not induce same enthusiasm. The R's

functionality is far from unique, and the optical superiority is too

marginal to justify the expense, from a rational point of view.

But unlike you, I find very similar tactile and intellectual pleasure

in handling R as in handling M, and that 'justifies' the investment

for me. Construction, ergonomy, general feel, are very reminiscent of

M. And so are many of the MTF charts, of course, if you need to

rationalise.... ;-)

May 14, 2002

Oliver,

My "remarks about his private life " were not remarks at all, but a

tongue in cheek hint, accompanied by a smiley. I hope that is how it

has been understood. Kristian has always been forthcoming in

supplying here private details about his life, including the status

of his girlfriend ("fiancée"), her name, and pictures of her. And she

is lovely !

I am way too paranoid to ever share such private details in a public

site myself BTW...

On a more general behaviour topic: I seem to get into conflict by the

sole fact that I have a tendency to take people seriously when I read

them, to remember what they write and to feel and express

disappointment when I encounter blatant incoherence or self-denial.

Kristian is not the only one of us showing such a lack of coherence.

People (the well known "lurker") do make (or change) buying/selling

decisions according to what they read here and in other web

resources. I have been personally influenced in that respect, and

have spent cash based on evaluations I have read in newsgroups. You,

I, and all posters (should) take responsibility for what we state,

recommend or denounce, and (should) think twice before posting

extactic comments or other positive or negative recommendations. It

is very easy to pose as "specialists" or "pros" even when we really

are incompetent bored wannabees with a computer and too much time on

our hands.

Also, when you ask questions to others, you should respect the time

and the work spent to provide documented answers. I personally spent

well over an hour scanning illustrative pics to respond to a previous

request on same topic by Kristian, others have spent time on this as

well, I'm sure. It is legitimate to feel irritated when you realise

that whatever answers are supplied, the guy seems keen to start from

scratch again and require more of the same.

May 14, 2002

Not that I want to get dragged too far into this game, as the search

capabilities on Lusenet are rather "rustic", but I repeat that you

have been putting forward questions, as well as statements, on the

topic of "oh boy I cannot focus that 90 saa and need to trade it

against F100, Y or Z, what do you think?", at least half a dozen

times in recent weeks. That is counting posts in various threads, not

actual thread creation, where I find 'only' 3 thread creations (on

top of the 90mm trade/selling threads.

In the 4 weeks prior to that, you have produced other clear cut

statements saying how terrific the 90 saa is. In March, you produced

statements such as "At f/2 it matches my old and loved Nikkor AF 85mm

f/1.4 at f/4", "I just wanted to shout this out to the world as I am

absolutely estatic", I must guess you had no problem focusing it at

the time...

BTW, I do not have any problem searching my private inbox and sent

items folder, but do not consider it proper to publicise private

mails. However, the following sentence from you is innocuous enough

not to violate privacy while illustrating my point: "I'd like a Dynax

9 or 7 with the 85mm f/1.4, but I need to find an easy trade. "

Now, since you challenged me, and by typing a couple of words in

Google, I've just encountered some of your posts in other fora, such

as a lens review where you describe your photo background

as "professional" with "11-20 years experience". Which is a great

achievement as you have presented yourself here last January as being

23! And statements regarding the 85mm f1.4 Nikkor AF such as "This

lens will stay with me forever" (August 1). If I were your fiancée, I

would worry about your promises of eternal commitment ! ;-)

Nothing wrong with all this. Part of the fun. My only gripe is that

it is irritating to take someone's questions seriously, to the point

of gathering illustrative images and posting them at his request,

only to realise that such efforts are pretty useless, and seem

forgotten after a few days...

May 13, 2002

Cris,

Take a look at the "What wide-angle R? 19/2.8 or 21/4? (paolo

folzani, 2002-05-07) " thread below...

May 13, 2002

Krisrian,

1. The kind of equipment purchase/selling cycle you are falling into

gets tremendously expensive very fast. But that is your problem

obviously;

2. You have asked similar questions on SLR portrait combos about half

a dozen times in the last few weeks. Many people have provided fully

argued and illustrated responses, in private and public answers. Kind

of irritating to see same questions popping up again, seemingly

ignoring previous answers, and your own feedback to those answers.

Why don't you address your questions on non_leica gear to the ad hoc

specialised brand forums?

3. The Contax manual focus SLR line is being gradually terminated.

The servicing on 2nd hand gear will not go on for ever. A 2nd hand RX

might already be pretty old. Beware. The hardware and lenses are OK,

but reliability of bodies can be an issue, as I have personally

witnessed in the past with various bodies. Smoothness of operation is

a reality with that range, but that does not necessarily mean less

vibrations. I have used the CZ 85mm f1.4, and it is a very nice

classic. Just as nice (no more no less) as equivalents in other

ranges. Th 85mm f2.8 is 1 stop slower than all competitors, with

absolutely no imaging advantage at any aperture. The 100mm f2 is

leicaesque in price. The 135mm f2.8 does not focus close enough. The

35mm f1.4 is a very average lens (a long long way from your 'lux

Asph).

4. Other alternatives exist, with similar quality and much better

functionality. Minolta Dynax 7 and 9 come to mind, with the fantastic

85mm f1.4 and other unique specialised 'portrait' lenses (100mm SF,

135mm STF). The Canon (AF) and Nikon (AF and MF) offers are widely

available, new and 2nd hand, with very good servicing capabilities

for recent hardware. Quality potential in imaging terms is more than

you (or I) will ever be capable of reaching with any of those lenses.

5. A f1.4 aperture is an asset (a f1.2 one even more so), that brings

competitive advantages in real world terms (ease of focusing, comfort

of view, low light capability). A SLR + 85mm f1.4 lens is a pretty

universal combo, easy to use indoors, where you will end up using it

anyway (unless you get rid of the rest of your M equipment). Longer

focal lengths are less practical indoors.

6. Latest generation AF and latest generation flash management

capability are nice to add to the cocktail. If you decide to go for

85mm f1.4, this leaves you with Dynax 7 or Nikon F100.

7. R8 is also to consider, if you are contaminated by the Sölms

virus. I use the 100 macro elamrit, but I lust for the 80mm 'lux. And

there is a R version of the APO Summicron 90/2 Asph on the way within

the coming months. That one could be the final Graal....

May 8, 2002

Paolo,

I use the new gen 19f2.8, and highly recommend it. It is the best

ultra-wide angle lens I have ever used: no distortion, very high

contrast and resolution, very high level of flare immunity, very low

vignetting. At least on par, performance wise, with the wonderful

21mm f2.8 M asph. But much more practical.

One of its main selling points, from my point of view, is the

excellent performance at f2.8. This means you can use the

capabilities of ultrawide photography in low light, with absolutely

no quality trade off. This is a priceless bonus not only when

shooting in cramped indoors settings, but also when shooting outdoors

in the evening.

The very close minimum focusing distance of this lens, together with

the extensive DoF implied by such a focal length, allows you to go

for spectacular near/far compositions in landscape images, as well as

in dynamic indoors shots (workplaces, factories, museums,

exhibitions, etc).

Focusing is a breeze if you follow the "Ted Grant book of rules" for

wide angle focusing (see relevant thread on this site).

The construction of the latest 19mm is a clockwork wonder, typical of

most R lenses. It balances very well on a R8. And it looks nice! It

has a set of on board filters, on a turret, mainly for b/w work or

color correction.

May 6, 2002

I do not like most of what this "phil" poster posts, but I like even

less the lynching mobs. Internet fora have always been hide and

seek games: one is allowed through the media itself to post

anonymously or under a fake ID. This is play. This is not

professional life. Being (a little) rude or crazy is part of the game.

If you want a private club and tight access control, use other

media !

Publishing to the community the hidden ID elements (IP

addresses) allowing zeroing in on one real world individual, and

then encouraging mobbing of same individual, is not my idea of

deontological group management. If the owners of this list want

a defined poster out of the group, they should organise that

exclusion through their own software management and access

control tools, not through lynching.

May 3, 2002

Robin,

A "steeper cam" would be a risky proposition, as a few microns rather

than millimeters rotation of the ring at close range would change the

plane of focus in a visible way. The translation of such minute ring

movements into the rangefinder mechanism would have to be even more

exactingly precise than it already is. When you read about all those

stories of mismatched bodies and lenses, you would think Leica should

avoid going further overboard with its stringent tolerance

requirements.

Also, in the SLR world, experience with many AF lenses used in manual

mode shows that the steep focus throws managed by the AF shaft

mechanisms can be quite hard to manage precisely when focusing

manually. Using AF macro lenses for example has always left me

frustrated. While the long focus throw at short range of MF macro

lenses such as the 100 elmarit or 105 micro nikkor AIS allow very

precise focusing in a comfortable and secure way.

At short distance (0.70m-1.20m) the throw of the 75mm seems

reassuring to me, and the focus information is translated clearly by

the rangefinder. From infinity to 'average' distances, where DoF is

not quite as minimal, the throw is steeper of course, and allows

faster (and accurate) focusing. Brilliant design IMHO.

Finally, as stated before, in real world daily terms, I find it hard

to buy the argument that the size and functionality of the 75mm make

it unfit for M usage. I feel the opposite is true: choosing to use

the M rather than a SLR for most of my shooting, I clearly prefer

having to carry a 75mm (or another M tele) around, rather than being

forced to carry a R8+80mm (or F100+85mmf1.4, or etc) on top of the M

system. I personally use a Minolta SLR + 85mm f1.4 deliberately when

on a 'portrait' assignement, but certainly do not want to carry that

combo around day in day out....

When it comes to achieving low light tele capability with the M, the

75 'lux is a very attractive space and weight saving solution. The

other one is the 90 'cron. But I prefer faster when possible.

Tony's ordeal might mean that he holds a lemon, which is extremely

irritating. Wonder how his tripod test worked out. It might also mean

he is plainly allergic to that M combo, and that is a real pity for

him, because it can work beautiful magic (maybe not from under a coat

at JCPenney though).

May 3, 2002

Thanks Stefan for flagging this. A remarkable article, like most

articles on that site.

Digital is evidently in the process of reaching maturity for almost

all photographic applications, and the question 99% of active film-

based photographers ask themselves now is "shall I step over to

digital now or wait another 18 months for the next generation?".

Not "if", but "when".

For Leica R users, this doubles with a "shall I get rid of my R

equipment now, while it still has some resale value, in order to

migrate to a platform that will provide me with state of the art

digital when I decide to step over? Or shall I remain faithfull to

Solms and take the risk of seeing my $$$$ investment being pushed

even more into the margins of the photographic flows within 18

months?"

For Leica M users, I feel those questions are probably less pressing,

as digital will need to perform some quantum leaps forward in terms

of power management (!!!), operational time lags, low light

sensitivity, ergonomy and reliability to really compete with the M.

So, I Another 4 years before the M's demise?

But when it comes to final results, one must admit that the future is

here already. Thanks to those fantastic Japanese engineers, I shall

add, who, as they have done for the last 40 years, have the unique

talent of blending latest international technology developments with

state of the art photographic functionality, in an increasingly

affordable package... ;-)

May 3, 2002

Ray,

John Collier's advice is worth its weight in gold ! The trick is to

always start from minimum focus distance, with everything blurred in

the viewfinder, then move swiftly till your subject appears sharp. Do

not try to fine tune after that. If you doubt you hit the right

point, restart the whole process, from minimum distance end of the

focus ring. After a few shots, you will usually realise that you may

trust your first impressions, and will not spend too much time

repeating the process.

Ted Grant (from the LUG/LEG) was the one who educated me (and many

others) in adopting that behaviour, and it came as an epiphany.

I use the 19f2.8 on the R8, and now find it a breeze to focus. Always

on spot and always fantastic. Much more versatile and useful than the

21mm+separate viewfinder on the M, in my experience.

But I would agree that a 35mm is much easier to focus quickly and

accurately with a M rather than a R (or any manual focus SLR).

Strange though that you do not encounter the same problems when you

adapt your R lenses on EOS bodies: I find the R8 screen and finder

(with diopter correction) pretty contrasty and focusing-friendly, and

certainly more so than my FM (without diopter correction must I add).

That is why my R equipment includes 19, 50, 100 and 180, but no other

wide angle

May 2, 2002

Rob,

This seems to lead to the eternal bokeh discussion I think, rather

than strict DoF maths.

I suppose one lens of a given focal length at a given aperture with a

given subject might render an *impression* of a deeper depth of focus

than another lens of same focal length, using same aperture and

capturing same subject because of the way spherical and other

aberrations step in once you are beyond the strict plane of exact

focus....

This would not necessarily mean that the measurement of the circle of

confusion would lead to mathematically "acceptable" figures in the

instance giving deeper sharpness depth impression...

May 2, 2002

Ray,

I do not quite understand your remark: the Nocti gives exactly the

same DoF as the 'cron at same apertures, obviously...

To get more DoF with the Nocti, you are allowed to close it down:

it's aperture ring is not stuck and fixed at f1 !

On the other hand, you cannot open the 'cron beyond f2, and you are

stuck much earlier than the Noctilux user once the light starts

saying "nay"....

May 2, 2002

Noah,

The faster the better, as you already know. DoF management must be

somewhat easier than with the 75 at f1.4, as pointed above. I'm more

and more convinced that the Nocti is the ultimate "standard" lens.

it's only downside (if you accept weight/volume) is the fact that

minimum focus is 1m, while minimum focus for 35 asph 'lux, 75 'lux

and latest 50 'lux is 0.70m. That might make a real difference in

clubs, living quarters, etc, where your subject is often sitting at

narrow table distance.... No tight head/shoulders with the Nocti. But

there, the 75 shines at its peak !

May 2, 2002

Tony,

Like others here, I use the 75mm on a 0.72 classic, with no focusing

problem whatsoever, even at max aperture, even at closest distance.

When I say "no focusing problem" that also means that I am extra

careful in those circumstances, and take the time to fine tune and

think of what happens while I reframe. One does not use a 75mm at

f1.4 at 0.70m as a 35mm at f5.6 at 3m... Not quick 'n dirty focusing

here.

So, with that in mind, the long focusing throw is a blessing rather

than a curse: you need that micrometric precision.

The 75 'lux, when used for what it is made, is a far cry from what

one would expect from a rangefinder combo. It is heavy and cumbersome

compared to other M lenses (on par with Noctilux and 90 'cron). It is

challenging, and when you think of it, it might even seem kind of

masochistic, both from a manufacturer and a user standpoint, to

consider such a lens outside of the SLR realm...;-)

But I feel it is the most useable and useful telelens for the M,

generating wonderful images that one would have a very hard time

generating with other equipment combinations. And, if you carry a M

around, it is much less uncomfortable to have the 75 in a (big)

pocket than a R8+80 'lux over the shoulder..

So, go on trying !

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by jacques_balthazar1