james_elwing

<p>If you want a 90, pick up a clean coated f4 Elmar in M mount, and use it while you look for something more expensive. It will cost you little, and you can sell it when you have a replacement. The M version did get a slight redesign which makes the lens head heavier and deeper than the 1931 original, and it was made for the M3.</p>

<p>Why not a round image 180 degree fisheye? That would have to be 8mm. They are highly amusing to children and make good, if old fashioned, family groups.</p>

<p>There was a rather down at heel Leica IIIA with Elmar lens at a general auction recently, that I heard someone say was a IIID. I didn't hang around, but later heard it had gone for $1200.<br> Clearly, more than one person with little knowledge had gone online and thought they could bag a bargain. $15,000 worth for only $1200; instead they paid $1200 for $250 worth.<br> Its really because Leicas have a reputation for being horrendously valuable</p>

<p>They made Viso II to fit M and also LTM, only that had a different arm, so it settled in the correct position over the release button.</p>

<p>There is an MC meter shown on the 'classic cameras' forum with an incident metering accessory visible. Look at 'a Multi Element Giveaway'</p>

<p>Viso I requires a double cable release, while II or III have a bar across to the shutter so the mirror lifts, then the shutter actuates sequentially. The PLOOT is just a bit squarer I think.<br> The main thing is that the later versions are more versatile, taking shorter 65mm & 90mm lenses. Only I & II are made for LTM screw mount; II & III for M mount.</p>

<p>Don't worry about if it is a genuine gold Leica. It isn't. It is a genuine Russian copy in brass that has been given Leica markings. <br> As such, it has a real niche for Leica collectors, and value. I think you might have to settle for that. I believe it's worth more as a fake than the Russian camera it came from.<br> Sorry your friend is ill. </p>

<p>I agree; keep the Leica.</p>

<p>The uneven shading shows more in earlier shots, and not OK. Maybe if you work the shutter through each speed a number of times it will settle down; otherwise, yes, a service. Pics in general look OK; you must be pleased.<br> The collapsible Summicron is very sharp in centre, not so sharp in corners. It is a nice and convenient lens to use. The normal lens cap doesn't like to stay on with a filter in place, so I don't use one. <br> Sounds like you have a good front element coating. I would protect that with a filter. Mine was destroyed before I got it, and subsequently polished away.</p>

<p>The incident light meter attachment on the front of the Leica MC Meter was quite accurate, particularly using slide film. If you have a good MC meter, it's worth having. Most of these attachments seem to get lost. I don't know if they came automatically with the meter...... </p>

<p>You sell out of Leica, you won't be able to afford to buy back in. Do you only have one lens? Old 90mm & 135mm lenses are cheap<br> I would also go for Canon DSLR. Only long Leica M lenses on Visoflex mounts will get infinity focus on DSLR.</p>

<p>Try a new memory card, and try that memory card in another camera?</p>

<p>The Samyang 16 seems to be a clean lens at all apertures. You get the option to balance shutter speed, aperture and ISO against one another, that you haven't been getting with your slow 18-55, to get the best image.<br> I don't know if you might benefit from using a viewfinder magnifier on APS-C, which has a smaller image to focus with. I have trouble getting accurate full aperture manual focus. </p>

<p>I assume the extra speed of these lenses makes either of them more desirable for you than the Canon 10-18 f4.5-5.6, which, with IS, is otherwise quite a good little lens?</p> <p> </p>

<p><em>...after all, why would you want to hit someone with your camera?</em><br> <em>After reading some of the contentious threads on PN, you may want to rethink that question.</em><br> That was a defense ploy only. You are clearly right; I yield.</p>

<p>If your MC meter is OK, fine. Many are worn out. There is an incident light attachment which later meters don't have. It's just that the reading doesn't lock, and it's best to protect the meter within a camera case.</p>

<p>So a C3 or a Zenit each recommended in a bar fight? One could claim as defense that violence was not intended beforehand; after all, why would you want to hit someone with your camera?</p>

<p>Summicron & M3. For a single 50mm lens. They were made for each other; .73 makes no sense to me.<br> What I would question is the piggy back meter. An old Metrawatt MC might not be up to the task with your low light requirements. An MR or MR4 will be. All are at least linked to the speed dial, and quick to use.<br> The V/C meter is probably more accurate (?), but it's not linked to the speed dial. I haven't used one, don't know how fast they are to use in practice. Anyone who has used one care to comment?<br> I would footle around with your Nokton at full aperture only, for a roll, with the M3, to see if it can take you where you want to go via focusing accuracy and image quality. </p>

<p>It depends how close you can get to the exhibits, but with architectural models, a Leica with super wide like 15mm (eg 15 C/V) placed within the model with the self timer actuated gives a unique sense of place. (small aperture) everything else tends to look like telephoto/ long lens viewpoint, but nothing wrong with that.<br> You will probably be restricted to distant access, so if you have to look through glass, maybe a polariser might help?<br> If you are allowed, maybe a monopod if you don't want complications of flash. Holding onto the leg, this might also allow you to operate the camera to some extent over the rail layout using self timer.<br> Sounds fun, anyway.</p>

<p>They made T mount adaptors for 39mm zenith SLR's and for Leica RF (Canon, Zorki etc) so one could use pre set lenses. With wide lenses, these were often quite good in the centre but pretty ordinary in the corners.<br> This doesn't help with the Helios 44, does it. It was a great lens for the price</p>

<p>Zenit 39mm Pitch thread is fine; interchangeable with Leica. Lenses and accessories like the Zenit bellows work fine with Leica reflex housing/ visoflex</p>

<p>Helios 58mm in 39mm fits the Zenit - Zenit 3M SLR's with a 39mm mount, in many ways all a Leica II with a pentaprism mounted on top. Later Zenits were Praktica/Pentax mount.</p>

<p>There are so many different models. Live view is a benefit that makes a camera a platform for so many other applications, but do we need this versatility. Honestly my habits haven't changed from film to digital; a modern SLR and M camera(s). Once one had an M3 and kilograms of accessories like Visoflex, adaptors etc or a Pentax Spotmatic.<br> I always want a viewfinder, even with cheap little Canon compact A590, but with that, use live view quite a lot of the time.</p>

<p>They have made RF for 83 years, bit hard to ditch it now. Some people like it.<br> They are making other models that don't. </p>

<p>Fungus bloom is what retires most zooms, as there are so many glass surfaces to clean, and you have to pay the piper. Lots of very old and cheap EOS lenses full of fungus 'work' perfectly.<br> Would you call a 1989 EF 50 1.8 a kit lens? Not trying to be smart, but I understood those early 50's were well put together and well thought of. </p>