adam_lang1

<p>The all chrome version is lighter than the subsequent chrome with vulcanite versions. Similar to black model in weight, probably more brass.<br>

There is optical variation amongst 4 element 90 Elmars as I pointed out A while ago:<br>

<a href="/leica-rangefinders-forum/002q4N">http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/002q4N</a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>What about all the people with DP mailers? WIll Dwaynes process c-41?</p>

<p>This is an outrage. These are contracted services that the Eastman Kodak company is legally obligated to provide (at least those mailers which have no expiration date or have not yet expired). I personally might settle for the list price in CASH for this obligation, certainly not for a couple of single use cameras. </p>

<p>In this Internet age it would be easy to spread this information and find a lawyer to initiate a class action lawsuit for the thousands of people who have these mailers (PK's DP's ESP-1's). The publicity generated alone would not be favorable for EKC...<br>

Any lawyers out there?</p>

<p>Someone in Rochester has not thought this out very well....</p>

<p>Adam Lang</p>

"I forgot to mention that the older 90mm Elmars are no issue when used on the CL. I have tested the compatibility issues from both directions and have encountered absolutely no problems."

 

Including the COLLAPSIBLE version?

My yellow glass Summicron is one of the first batch #921654. I keep it (when not in use) on a IIIf RDST in one of those old lead lined bags (now useless) they used to sell to protect film from xrays.

 

Just playing it safe. I would sell it if I were really worried...

 

I used to have a SM 5cm cron over 1.3 million sn, definitely not yellow glass.

Yes- that's what I'm implying, combine the different tifs in one as layers

Are you shooting RAW? IF so you can avoid this problem by working with multiple files (TIF or JPG) derived from the same CR2 file, each RAW converted in such a way to give a correct exposure for each part of the scene. Very easy with ACR 2.4 and PS-CS.

Sparkie-

 

>exasperated sigh< How do you know the 35/2 EF isn't a great performer unless you've used it YOURSELF? There's sample variation among lenses as well as among reviewers. Don't believe everything you read; what counts is the results you get with your equipment.

 

Buy an EF 35/2, keep it clean, and if in three months you don't like it, sell it on eBay and get probably 80+% of your investment back. What are you risking, maybe 50 bucks? Can you say the same for a new Leica R lens? If you buy a 35/2 Summicron-R ROM and don't like it, you might take a $500 loss selling it...

 

Don't forget the advantages of autofocus and not having to manually stop down the lens between focusing and exposure (with R lens + adapter), unless you use your 35 wide open all the time....

 

Actually the best solution for you might be to buy an EF 35/2 and a used 3-cam 35/2 Summicron-R II (don't even consider the Canadian first version if you want a compact lens, it's a beast). Compare them side to side on your 1Dmk2 on your subject matter with your style.

 

 

Adam

Well I've owned both 35/2-R crons and on film cameras they were *at most* minimally better than the EF 35/2 (Leicaflex SL and Canon Elan 2E). Frankly, both seemed inferior to the EF lens on a D60, probably attributable to the difficulty manually focusing with that camera. There is always going to be sample variations between lenses, so why not try the EF; your downside risk is minimal as there is an overwhelming demand for used EF gear!? (and you might end up eating the (cost of)the Leica lens, particularly if you pay the horrendous cost of a new lens).

BTW the old Canon FD 35/2 (first version, chrome front with radioactive elements)beats all three, easily (on a T90), but then radioactivity has discolored the glass over time...

If money is no object (ie you're considering buying the 35 Summicron R new), then why not consider the EF 35/1.4?; lens universally reviewed as superb. I haven't tried it myself, too costly. Once again your downside risk ($) is small for the above reasons....

I have the 300 5.6 FL-F and 500/5.6 FL-F lenses. Both are superb. The lack of FD function in these lenses is insignificant as they are used almost always wide open and work well in stopped-down AE on an A-1 or T90.

Why not try the Canon EF 35/2, a fine $220 lens made to work with your camera while the value of the Leica 35/2 R probably continues to diminish...?!

Then when (and if ever) you get a digital R, you could eBay your clean Canon 35/2 for $175+ and maybe come out ahead on the deal...

Although apparently not documented there were optical differences (other than different coating) in postwar 9cm Elmars. I have four; a late black A36, all chrome A36, chrome with black band A36 and a later E39 model. THe E39 model has a flatter front element than the other three, but all perform equally well....

I tried back clicking on both the thumbnail and the 0pened picture, rebuilding the thumnail is not a choice.

 

Any other ideas?

This is very frustrating. With auto rotate on, vertical JPGs (JPGs

only, no problem with CR2)files appear in Photoshop CS browser to be

horizontal. After opening and rotating, they're still wtong in the

prowser thumbnail, sometimes upside down, and then I have to rotate

90 degrees CCW to get them vertical (from upside down)!

Has anyone else had this problem? Solution?

 

Thanks!

Adam Lang

Well I meant to anyway.

Gone digital now so the old 3.5 cm Elmar is sitting in a drawer...

I do not understand how a Nikkor can RF focus to 2.7 feet. The cutout for the RF arm on my Leitz 50mm SM-M adapter is only deep enough to allow focusing to 1 meter (close focus limit of old Leitz SM lenses).

When I put it on my 50/1.4 Nikkor it will only RF couple to 1 meter on an M2, M4-P or M6.

?

Yes, the T90 will rewind when it feels the resistance at the end of a roll, but it will ALSO rewind if it first reaches the DX-coded number of exposures on the roll OR after 36 exposures. There is a distinctly different feel to the camera when it rewinds due to reaching resistance versus reaching DX number or 36. Run a DX-coded 12 or 24 exposure roll of waste film through with and without the DX coding on the cassette covered for comparison. With the DX covered you'll get a shot or two more and feel it reach the resistance, pause, and then rewind. With the Dx coding uncovered it will take the DX-coded number and then immediately rewind. Or bulk roll 40 exposures into an unmarked cassette. It will rewind after 36, long before reaching resistance.

Yes the rare earth chrome nose 35/2 FD is superb. Either it or the same lens in SSC (both with concave front element and minimum stop of F16)easily outperform the lackluster convex front element 35/2 SSC (minimum stop f22). Of course they are a tad radioactive and that has discolored the glass yellow/green over time, but only a problem if you shoot chromes.....

The T90 will rewind based on either The DX coded number of exposures or resistance at the end of the roll, whichever comes first. But in no circumstance will it go beyond 36 exposures. Years ago I put a roll of HP5 72 exposure film into my T90. It rewound after 36.

 

Since current 36 exposure film rolls are longer than 36 (check the amount of unexposed negative film in a roll shot with a T90), you can confirm this easily by taping over the DX contacts on a 36 exposure roll and run it through your T90 (remembering to manually set the ISO).

 

Dollars to donuts it will rewind after 36.....

>The fastest 35mm lens canon ever made (for 35mm photography) was the >35mm f1.8 it was for the rangefinder....

 

Isnt there an EF 35/1.4?

I believe EF lenses are still used on an occasional film camera or two....

The 300/5.6 FL-F (fluorite, Canon's seminal first lens to use fluorite) is very sharp. I compared it to an older FD 300/5.6 a while back, no comparison, particularly with respect to laterl chromatic abberation. But then that is what the fluorite is for, anyway...

2.3 million, definitely not the fourth version. Probably the second.

M2? I dont think so.

Not the best picture, but with the raised part in front beneath the screw over the vertical RF adjustment and the raised frames around the windows this camera looks like an original MP.

 

What does the top engraving say?

I believe there is a little logo over the screw site in the M6 and someone once said a special tool is now needed. Another reason to buy an M4-P!

Horizontal adjustment of the RF is done by adjusting the slot on the RF arm...

Sure it would work, but you would only get close-up focusing. More satisfying would be using the same setup with a lens (or lens head with appropriate adapter) which is useable on the Visoflex II/IIa/III.

The minimum focal length to maintain infinity focus is 65mm. ie the 65mm f3.5 Elmar-V (chrome or black). I've used such a setup with an R4s, an SL, and a Canon D60 (with the addition of an R to EOS adapter)

using a 65 Elmar, 280/4.8 Telyt and various LTM/M lensheads with a plethora of attachments/extension tubes (90/4 Elmar(v1), 90/2.8 Elmarit(v1), 90/2 Summicron (v1), 135/4.5 Hektor, 135/4 Elmar.