leicamshooter

Christian,

Wonderful photographs! You get a nice sense of the everyday goings on of Shanghai. You run a pretty consistent thread through your work.

Thanks for posting,

Gonzalo

I went to Terry's Camera store in Long Beach, with my glasses on, and was able to look

through the viewfinder of an M3 & M4-P. I had no lens on the cameras, so I used the preview

lever to bring up the 50/75 framelines on the M4-P. To my surprise, the 50mm frameline

was not as small as I would have imagined it on the M4-P! I coud not make out the 28mm

frameline, and the 35mm was only hardly visible looking directly on. The 50mm however was

nice, and there was a comfortable amount of space outside the frameline, but not too much.

On the M3, I coud not make out all of the 50mm frameline looking directly on. I never

noticed this before! They didn't have a .85X Leica M, but right now, the .72X on the m4-P

looks fine.

Wonderful photos! It looks like the M3/50mm combo works great for you. It looks like a few

were shot "from the hip." Did you really shoot them this way, or was it just you positioning

quickly for the shot. I'm interested in your technique.

I'm pretty much a one lens user, and have only used the .91 M3 finder for 50mm lenses.

However, I'm considering moving onto a .72 finder, or maybe a .85 finder. I imagine the

75mm framelines must be distracting in both the .72 & .85 finder if all one uses is a 50mm

lens. For all 50mm lens users, just how "bad" is it to use anything but a .91 finder for a

50mm lens, beyond the obvious magnification? What are your experiences?

Thanks!

It does have a click stop, but you might not feel it when it locks. It's very faint. I'm pretty sure

the rear lens is coated, as are the internal elements. If you want to collapse it

and carry your M camera in your jackt pocket, then it makes a great lens. This is how I used

it. It only has half-cick stops up till F8, then it's whole stops. It's also plenty sharp for

anything most of us would need it for. If you want to shoot ISO 50 film on a tripod at F2.8,

then maybe the summicron would be better... that's a big maybe!

Best of luck!

John,

I just realized, that you're the gentleman I sold my 35/2 Canon to!

oops, Try this instead

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cz

5A

I placed a 40mm Heliopan filter for sale a few weeks ago, but it

didn't sell. I'm going to be putting it up on the popular auction site

soon. Let me know if you're interested.

<http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cz

5A>

I've got a chrome current M elmar hood #12549 in box I can sell

to you. It a 39mm screw in hood. You can find pictures at B&H

etc. I've also got the chrome Leica 39mm UV filter in original

case as well?

Fishing<p>

<img

src="http://gallery.leica-users.org/albums/colour/03350021_G.si

zed.jpg"><p>collapsible summicron

<img

src="http://gallery.leica-users.org/albums/Colour-Snaps/060800

04_G.sized.jpg">

<p>

San Clemente Pier. Collapsible Summicron

For what it's worth, I went to Paris with an M3, 50mm lens, and a

hand held meter. They were the best photos I ever took of Paris. I

had visited Paris a few months before with a G2 and 3 lens

outfit, but my style of shooting was not as spontaneous. "Do I

shoot the Eiffel with the 28mm or 45mm... etc." In theory the

more lenses you have the more options you have for

photographs, but keeping it simple improved my photography a

lot. Oh, and my wife is now the owner of the G2, and she loves

having options when she takes a picture.

I too had qualms about the wear on collapsible lenses in

comparison to non-callapsible lenses. I find that I don't need to

collapse my 1952 summicron as often as I thought I would. It's

already pretty comapct, and remains in my camera bag

extended, ready for use, 90% of the time. If I want ultra-compact I

collapse it and can fit it in my coat pocket.

Curious about how others feel in regards to choice of film

between color slide and color negative.

Brian Bower in "Leica M Photography," mentions that "With

colour the first choice is between colour transparencies and

colour negatives. If you are not looking to sell your work for

quality publication- books, magazines, calendars, brochures etc-

but mainly require prints for personal use or occasionally to

enlarge for house decor or exhibition purposes, then negative

film is the answer. It is less demanding in terms of exposure

technique and it is easier and cheaper to get satisfactory prints

both initially and when enlargements are needed," (p 94).

Sounds pretty reasonable to me, so if one is not a professional,

but is seeking to print for exhibition purposes, is negative film the

best choice in terms of quality, value, and convenience of use

today?

Thanks,

Gonzalo

I have some photos taken with a very clean collapsible

summicron. I can e-mail you a few at different apertures so you

can get an idea of the fingerprint. Wide open it only flares

sometimes, and not when you might expect it. The Bokeh on the

collapsible is Monet like, and very pleasing. Stop down, the lens

performs very well and has a tad less contrast than a modern

summicron. Wide open, the contrast is less, but this may or may

not be important to you. I've owned both modern and 1st version

summicron, but never a Rokkor.

Does anyone have MTF graphs for the collapsible summicron, or

know where I can find them. I've had one for a few months now

and love its fingerprint. The bokeh is fantastic. I think I now have

a fundemental understanding of how MTF graphs work, and

would enjoy looking at how the collapsible summicron graph

differs from the curernt model. I've been able to shoot with both,

so I know how they differ on the print.

<p>

Thank you for your time,

Gonzalo Medina

<p>

<img

src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b5dd35b3127cce90f98

2bd6d6e00000046138AaMmbNizZOH">

<p>

<b> Collapsible Summicron Wide Open <b/>

Wondering if anyone owns these two lenses and has compared

results at F2 and F5.6? I'm wondering if the curvature of field,

which is minimal in the summicron, takes a big toll on the

sonnar at F2 and F5.6? What about Boke? Thanks for your

replies!

Yes, it is a Leitz lens, with slightly radioactive front elements.

Made in 1952. A very rare early production model. The glass is

slightly yellow, which I think must affect my photos, but I haven't

noticed it yet. If you leave the lens sitting on top of an unexposed

strip of tri-x, it will slightly expose the film in about 3-4 days. Not

enough to harm a person I think, but I would not use it as a loupe

either! Best of luck!

The collapsible is a low contrast lens wide open, but with very

pleasing out of focus rendition. This is nice for portraits. I haven't

used the rokkor, but as was mentioned already, I'm sure it's

better wide open, and more compact? I use the collapsible lens

on my M3. These lenses are pretty old now, so a few clean

marks won't affect it too much, but a lot of marks will cause it to

want to flare even more. If this is going to be your main lens, then

wait around for a clean one, and then send it to Sherry for a full

CLA. The coatings are very soft, so slap a UV filter on it, and the

12549 elmar hood keeps the lens more compact than the

current version. Do a search for it on photo.net and you'll come

up with more info than you wanted on the great and poor

qualities of the lens. Good luck! <p>

<img

src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b5dd35b3127cce90f98

2bd6d6e00000046138AaMmbNizZOH">

<p>

Shot wide open, 100 Gold

<img

src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b5dd35b3127cce90f98

2beec5d00000036138AaMmbNizZOH">

<p>

M3 & Collapsible Summicron