mike_foster

For Dan Brown: The Metz 34CS2 has a guide number of 28 and NOT 34.

Sadly last year Metz decided to "bump" up the guide numbers of their

entire range by quote the guide number at the higest tele setting

instead of the at the normal 50mm setting. So the 50MZ5 became the

70MZ5 and the 40's became the 54's. I have the 34CS2 as well and it

is a great flash unit, but it's guide number is 28, which is still

one stop more than the SF20. To get the 34 you need to attach the

tele adapter.

I have a Mamiya 7. That does not have TTL metering. So it if the lens

cap is left on, then you won't know.

<p>

Anyway, once I was taking pictures of my son with this Mamiya 7 at

Disney with Mickey Mouse. I hurried to get about 5 great shots in the

30 seconds I was allowed. My other son kept trying to tell me

something while I was taking those pictures. I kept telling "not

now!". Then when I finshed I asked him "OK, what was it you were

trying to tell me?".

<p>

"Your lens cap is on", he answered...

I too have been dying to try this film. But I just can't come across

it!

<p>

I first learnt of it at the PMA show earlier this year. I have

patiently been waiting for it ever since.

<p>

B&H has been listing it on their web site for the last month but when

ever I check it is always out of stock. And B&H won't take back

orders. Cameraworld do not have it. And Adorama lists it but don't.

Calumet does not have it on their web site.

<p>

So where do y'all get this stuff??? Share them connections!

I just noticed this item on E-Bay. The item number is 1260360794 and you can see it at:-

<p>

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1260360794

<p>

It is a Leica 90mm f1.0 lens!

<p>

Does anyone know any history for this lens?

Hey you Minox GT-E guys, how difficult is it focusing by estimate?

What about when shooting wide open at f2.8? It must be tuff, no?

<p>

One more thing. Is there anyway to take off that silly "skylight"

filter on the lens? What is it's purpose anyway? It no doubt adds

flare and if "protects" the lens, then why can't you change it? And

if you can't, then surely you need to protect that too! So what is

the logic???

<p>

I am thinking of getting this camera...

Chris. Truce it is! I am sorry too. I was just trying to make a point

to us US folks here that you need to add a lot of charges, that's all.

<p>

Actually our prices here are NOT that low! Like you said, even with

the extras, UK has better prices on Konica, Voigtlander and even some

of the Leicas. And on Mamiya stuff US prices are about TWICE than

that of the UK. Nikon and Canon maybe a little cheap here but only a

little. So don't feel so bad.

<p>

If you really want to feel bad, then let's talk "Petrol" prices... I

just filled up my tank and the price I paid was $1.14 per gallon or

about 20 pence per litre!!!

<p>

Take care now.

Chris, you are saying absolute "rubbish". Mark quoted the price in US

Dollars. So that information was NOT for you Brits. That information

was for people in the US, otherwise he would have said 370 "pounds".

Or do you use US Dollars in the UK now? Hell, you don't even like the

Euro!

<p>

Moreover your head does not work properly, since it was NOT Josh that

provided that information, but Marc. See, you don't even know what

you are talking about!

<p>

The information I provied was EXTREMELY useful for us folks here in

the USA. So there.

<p>

Go have a nice "cuppa" tea...

Josh,

<p>

I got mine from E-Bay. It is a small lens but not as small as the

Leica. It is lighter though, I think.

<p>

The hood is big. But I like it that way. It does not add to the

weight and it protects the lens surface.

<p>

Marc, you say "Robert White has the Hexar 35/2 for $525". That is SO,

SO misleading. For starters they do not take payments in US DOLLARS!

They are in the UK. They take "pounds" and they ask 370 of them.

<p>

Now, all you did was multiply that by the rate you got which I assume

is 1.4189. That rate is the Interbank rate for transactions of ONE

MILLION DOLLARS. How will you pay? Let's assume credit card. Even the

best credit card bank will give you a rate at least 2% less than the

Interbank rate. So you would get a rate of 1.4473 that makes is

$535.50. Then most credit card companies also charge a 1.5% "foreign

transaction fee". So makes it $543.53. Then the shipping. A minium of

$30, lets say. And then there is customs duty of 2.2%. So the total

is $585.49.

<p>

So there.

I have the Hexar 35/2 lens and I like it very much. First it is

cheap. I got mine for only $565. About half of what the ASPH

Summicron goes for.

<p>

I use it for low light with TMax 400 and wide open seems fine to me.

<p>

The build quality is amazing. Better than Leica in my opinion...

What is a "lense"? I looked it up in my dictionary and could not find

a definition. So please help me...

I have tried lots of Leica lenses. For the M series the sharpest to

me still seems the good old 50mm Summicron. For the R, I was blown

away with the 280/4 Apo Telyt.

<p>

Recently I have found the Zeiss 35mm Sonnar which happens to be in

the new Contax T3 to be one of the sharpest lenses ever! Certaintly

is as good as the 35mm Summicron ASPH at f5.6 and beyond. Maybe even

f4! What a lens!

Jack,

<p>

Why do you need f22 for 400 ASA film? Sunny f16 rule = 1/400 sec.

Hell, at 1/1000 sec you still have a stop and a bit. So why use f22

other than if you really need DOF?

<p>

By the way do you know that f22 your Leica will be no better than a

Russian lens?

<p>

Mike

2000 may be a fine Bordeaux, but look at the prices already!

The "futures" are going for MORE than 1995 or 1996, both great years.

Hell you can buy some good 2nd Growths of 1982 for slightly more than

what the same 2000 wines are going for! And you won't have to wait 10-

20 years to enjoy them!

<p>

2000 Bordeaux market has gone crazy .... stay away! Pick up some

1997's, the real bargains right now...

Make mine a bottle of '45 Mouton, please. Of course if I spill it

over my M6/35Lux I will be crying for the loss of the wine! (at $5000

per bottle)....

<p>

Seriously though, you can't beat a decent claret! California

(taxi?) "cabs" or whatever they call them are for those who don't

know but pretend to know! Like those dot.com IPO lucky bozos...

Pete,

<p>

Regardless if you believe in the bokeh "crap", you cannot deny the

fact that any out of focus bright point WILL appear as a triangle in

a 3 bladed diaphram or as pentagon in a 5 bladed diaphram. Ideally it

should appear as a circle. If not then as close to it as possible.

<p>

Look at our eyes, it is the best aperture! Fully round no matter what

it is stopped down to!

<p>

Anyway I for sure DO like more blades.

<p>

Mike

Hi,

<p>

It is been just over a week since my post. I have been amazed with

the amount of response for which I am very grateful. I have had

vastly different views and ideas from y�all.

<p>

Here are the suggestions I have received and my opinions for each of

them:-

<p>

PUSH AN 100ISO FILM. That is a good suggestion except for the loss of

shadow detail and so not useful to me.

<p>

GO FOR A LARGER FORMAT. This is bad suggestion in my opinion, even if

you ignore the extra weight of the equipment. I need a 400ISO film

because the light is low not because I like 400ISO film! Medium

format lenses are 2 stops slower than 35mm lenses. So then I would

need a 1600ISO film to compensate for the slower lenses. So I might

as well shoot 100ISO in 35mm!

<p>

C-41 FILMS. This is an excellent suggestion. I shot a couple of rolls

of the Kodak variety a few years ago and checked the grain and it was

almost non existent. Sadly however I cannot process them myself and

so to use these films would imply to be at the mercy of a lab and so

thereby ruling out these films too! I have since heard that you can

use regular B&W chemistry but the grain is horrendous. So there.

<p>

VARIOUS FILM DEVELOPERS LIKE PMK. This is a good suggestion. However

the amount of grain reduction, if any would be minimal. So it is not

worth my time to experiment.

<p>

TRY THE NEW DELTA 400. I feel that this is the best suggestion so far

for my needs. And so I have order a roll of this film!

<p>

One final note. Some have argued that sharpness is more important

than grain. That why is grain so bad? Well that is a personal

preference. I like silky smooth tonality and fine grain.

<p>

Here�s hoping that the NEW Delta 400 will be the one for me!

<p>

Thanks y�all!!!

The lens is so-so, but this is what you need to do to make it really

good:-

<p>

Process the lens in XTOL+2 for 8 mins at 68 degrees and agitate every

30 seconds for 2 seconds.

<p>

The results would be excellent!

<p>

Good luck!

Pete,

<p>

I can understand your agrument about the speed. But as you said that

would apply to SLR's only. In other cameras the aperture does not

move unless you change it.

<p>

So my argument still applies to the Contax T3, TVSIII, Mamiya 7, etc..

<p>

As for the Minox 35, no the two blade thing is not the shutter. Since

as you move the aperture ring you can control the two blades and see

the aperture open and close, while behind it you can see the shutter

clearly.

<p>

Mike

Martin,

<p>

I also like lenses that use lots of blades. One of my Leica M lenses

has 11 blades. I think that is a record. The Konica Hexar RF lenses

all have 10 since the Japanese love bokeh.

<p>

Having more blades makes out of focus lights look roundish and is

much nicer for the overall bokeh.

<p>

So why do some manufacturers use less blades? I don't know. My TVSIII

has 5 blades too! While my old TVS has 7. All my Mamiya 7 lenses have

only 5 blades too! I have seen a $7000 Hasslelblad lens, which is

their sharpest. It is the Zeiss Superachromat 350mm f5.6. That too

has only 5 blades! And they say it is great for portraits that blur

the background. Yet it has a terrible bokeh. Why did Zeiss put on 5

blades on their top of the line lens?

<p>

Anyway I thought 5 blades was the minimum, until today I say a Minox

35 GTE, which has TWO blades!!! Wow!

<p>

Mike

About the Manual mode on the Hexar RF:-

<p>

I agree with Jack. He describes is perfectly. You have to chase the

slowly flashing shutter speed to the lit one. A real pain! Almost

unusable! No comparision to the M6's two arrows and a dot in the

middle.

<p>

It is better to shoot the Hexar RF in Auto Aperture Priority because

of this poor manual mode.

If you want an aperture priority Leica M get a Konica Hexar RF.

<p>

I have used both and I MUCH prefer the Leica M maual mode. For

example when shooting in low light with a 35/1.4 lens I set the

shutter speed to 1/30 sec. Then I move the aperture ring to get the

middle dot to light. This is like "shutter priority". I can't do the

same thing with the Hexar RF's "automatic" mode....

Thanks very much for all the kind replies.

<p>

It seems the way to go is the C-41 films, i.e. XP2+. However I

process my own films.

<p>

Is there a way to process the XP2+ myself? Will any conventional B&W

developer work?

<p>

Thanks.

Hi,

<p>

I hate grain! All the films in the 100 ISO range are just so much better when it comes to grain as opposed to 400 ISO films. Why such a big jump in grain going from 100 to 400?

<p>

Currently I use TMax 400 and XTOL 1:2 and the grain, while better than Tri-X in D-76 1:1, is miles away from ANY 100 ISO film.

<p>

Anyway which is the best film / developer combination that will give me the least grain in 400 ISO?

<p>

Please help me get rid of grain!

<p>

Thank you.

Thanks for the ISBN number. Amazon.com do not have it. What a shame.

So much for "Earth's biggest bookstore"...

Roberto,

<p>

What is the ISBN number for the book? That will help me find a copy.

<p>

Thanks.