tom_duffy1

<p>Going to have to use adhesive tape to cover the red dot. now I'm going to have to carry that and electrical tape with me. This is getting complicated.</p>

Leicaflex SL shutter failure after 35 years. I like the used R8 that I replaced it with much better. M4 film counter stopped working after hitting the floor in a car accident. M6TTL rangefinder adjustment after being dropped on the street. It was in its case, however. The only real problem I've had was with a 90mm teleElmarit, which took a very slight knock against a car door and two elements decemented. It cost more to repair than the lens cost me in 1976.

 

Not a bad record, all in all...

When my 35 year old Leicaflex SL's shutter broke, I bought a used R8. I think the R8 is the best SLR that I've ever used. Although it's heavy, it fits the hand well and all the controls just fall into place. No menus or function wheels to deal with. The R8 (or R9) is one of the most instinctive cameras out there.

 

I once thought I would travel the world with my M6 and a 50mm lens, now I think that it might be with my R8 and 80mm.

I traded in my RZ ProII for a Contax 645 in 1999 and it was the right decision for me. Here's why:

The Pro II is heavy, especially with the pentaprism. Not heavy to pick up, but to use for hours on end. I had light leak problems with the 220 back. What most got to me was the bellows focusing. Ever try to quickly set a hyperfocal distance using the multiple lens distance scale on the side? You also had manually set the distance for the floating elements on the lens after looking on the side for the distance, otherwise your pictures would be less sharp than using a lens without floating elements. An instant return mirror is really nice. I decided that the Mamiya wasn't sharp enough for B&W landscape work. An 8x10 print using tmax 100 on the Pro II was less sharp than a 4x5 shot using Tri-x. Besides, my 4x5 Technica seemed lighter :).

 

The Contax handles like a 35mm but with considerably sharper output. Autofocus is much slower than a modern 35 SLR, but mostly quicker than focusing manually. The lenses are fantastic. It does go through batteries like water (get a battery grip and use rechargeables)

 

The decision is really up to you. It may be that the big 6x7 negative (obviously sharper than 6x4.5) coupled with close focusing SLR capabilities make the Pro II the perfect camera for you. Some of the best pictures I've ever taken were with the Pro II with a 150mm F 3.5 lens. I suggest you rent one for a weekend and shoot with it extensively and then make your decision.

 

Take care,

Tom

Unfortunately, the M8 introduction is going to be the stuff of MBA case studies. Wonder if they'll be around to introduce the M9.

 

I never intended to buy one, I shoot mostly black and white and still love the darkroom. When shooting color, I scan color negatives with a Minolta 5400. The dynamic range is phenominal. The output is much superior to the results of my wife's DSLR. I think people have forgotten what shadow detail looks like.

I own both. My 90 Summicron has been used quite extensively since purchased in 1976. It's a great portrait lens at f2 and is very sharp around f5.6 or f8. A nice combination in a single lens. It focuses to about 28 inches and allows you to get pretty tight. It was my default lens on my Leicaflex SL.

 

About a year ago I got a good price on a used 80 Summilux and use it on an R8. I prefer the 80mm. The extra speed is helpful and easier to focus, as well. The lens is entirely usable at f1.4, is much sharper (without being too sharp) than the 90 at f2 and is great for portraits down to about f4. Big difference for me is that it's an 80 not a 90. Doesn't sound like much of a difference but the focal length difference makes it much more of a universal lens, whereas the 90 was sometimes a bit long.

 

Take care,

 

Tom

I started using trifocals and the rangefinder experience isn't what it used to be. I also own a pair of "monitor" glasses, i.e., mid range only for viewing a computer screen. I find these let me focus my M down to .7 meters and are accurate enough for longer distance work. This has improved my quick focusing ablility a lot. The only drawback is that for normal distance viewing, e.g., driving, distant objects are not completely sharp. You may what to consider these as a good compromise when using the M.

Take care,

Tom

Colin,

I don't know if you have a problem. I own the same three lenses and all have the same resistance when you go past the end of the focusing range. I would say that as long as it focuses accurately, you shouldn't worry about it.

 

Take care,

Tom

I agree with Doug. The 90mm Summicron R generally has the nicest looking out of focus areas of any lens I've ever used. It is my single favorite portrait lens.

My wife has a Canon 10D with an 80-200 f2.8 lens. Whenever we're out together, everyone wants to see her camera and my M6TTL is virtually ignored. Finally, the anonimity we always claimed we wanted...

I own a 50mm Summilux and a 50mm f1.4 Canon USM. From f1.4 to about f4 I can tell the difference. The Summilux, btw, is better, albeit much more expensive, but also a considerably older design.

my thanks to all who responded. My SL is going off to DAG this week for an estimate.

My Leicaflex SL's shutter jammed in the open position this weekend.

I'm the original purchaser and it's given me a great 35 years of

extensive use. Despite the emotional attachment, I'm reluctant to

have it repaired; the meter isn't accurate, the rear eyepiece is

scratched to act like a diffraction grating when pointed at a strong

light source.

 

I have 3 lenses for it, a 50 summicron, a 90 summicron and the

original 180 f2.8 elmarit. The 90 is my favorite portrait lens for

the 35mm format. Despite the weight I've always enjoyed using the 180

in conjunction with a wider lens on my Leica M. All the lenses could

use a CLA.

 

I have four choices I'm considering.

1. purchase a lightly used SL to replace mine.

2. Purchase an SL2 which doesn't seem that much more expensive than

an SL in excellent condition.

3. buy an R8 and have my lenses recammed; slightly used an R8 seems

to cost under $1,000 and would give me a fast flash sync speed and

more modern camera.

4. say the hell with it and buy a good telephoto (thinking 135mm f2)

for my Canon 7N.

 

Any input would be appreciated.

1. 50mm Summilux M

 

2. 90mm Summicron R

 

both the older versions.

The zone system is not particularly applicable to 35mm except in its most basic form, "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights".

As has been observed, it's most applicable to sheet film - individual shots get specific exposure and development based on the contrast of the scene. a partial workaround would be to carry 2 cameras, one for low contrast scenes and one for high contrast scenes. If you are really interested, David Vestal had an article in some of the older Leica manuals (15th edition has it for sure), published by Morgan and Morgan, entitled the Zone system for 35mm.

Kevin, certainly not to answer for Al, but I would do a heavy burn of the car and parking lot underneath it with a #1 filter. the low contrast burning in would not be very apparent and it would, in my opinion reduce the brightness behind the groom which would be a good thing. You're right, though, the picture is better without the car.

Well said, Al! My 29 year old Durst A300 35mm autofocus enlarger is still going strong. It came with a 50 f2.8 Nikkor. I develop my film with Pyrocat HD and I amazed with the apparent shapness of my 8x10 prints. DMAX and traditional look and feel of a silver glossy count for a lot.

 

For extensive retouching or color printing, no arguement, though, digital has a lot to offer.

 

Take care, Tom

Jay, you already retired the friggin' trophy.

 

Love and kisses,

Tom

I'm encouraged that Leica, despite its financial difficulties, continues to produce state of the art lenses for the M camera.

 

That said, there are other qualities to lenses other than sharpness. I much prefer my now old 50 Lux to my 35 ASPH. Who really uses a 50mm for landscapes. The 50 is a people lens and sharpness isn't the be all and end all.

Jason,

I don't believe that you're hitting any minima in terms of output power. Again the unit in ttl mode works just fine for me at f1.4. parenthetically,the big advantage ttl has over an automatic flash is the ability to precisely dial in the flash exposure compensation irrespective of your chosen f stop.

 

I think you problem is the dark open background is being read by the circuitry as needing more flash. Maybe your solution is to use manual power, eg, 1/16, 1/4, etc, and figure out what distance you need to be at for a proper exposure. for example at 10 feet at f2 determine that your unit needs to be set at 1/4 power.

 

take care,

Tom

I normally shoot with the SF20 set for -3. the default setting is much too strong for fill flash. Seems to work fine for me (fills in the eyes nicely) when shooting at f1.4 or f2. make sure the obvious things are set right, e.g., set on ttl, not "A". best of luck.

B&H is known for inflated ratings on used equipment. I've looked at stuff rated 8 1/2 that I wouldn't rate a 4. There are lots of better places to buy used equipment.

Jeff,

 

I think you're right. I too own a 50 Lux and I have a 35 Summicron ASPH. I much prefer the 50 Lux for people pictures and use the 35 only when I need a wide angle. My first experience with a lens being too sharp (I never knew there could be such a thing!) was with a Canon 50 f2.5 macro lens. More and more I appreciate the individuality of image that the now old 50 Lux provides.

 

The 50 Lux is new enough if you've already paid for it. It's clearly superior to the current 50mm f1.4 Canon, which is the only lens I've done a detailed comparison with.

 

It will be interesting to see if the new Leica 50 turns out to be too sharp, as well. The 50 Summicron, despite its reputation for resolution/contrast never seemed oversharp. Hopefully Leica will take that approach with the new lens.

Take care,

Tom Duffy

Would anyone have an idea as to if a 2 element closeup filter or an extension tube would be preferable in terms of image quality?

I thought it was actually all about the shutter... :)