cameron_sawyer

Oh, this is fun. Who else has a "please build this lens" list?

 

Mine is:

 

1. Collapsible 50 'cron.

2. Asph 50 'lux (arguably, VC already builds it).

3. Collapsible 90 Elmar (f/2.8, not f/4).

4. Updated, ultra-compact, aspherical 28/2.8 Elmarit.

 

I don't see any appeal in a 35/1.0. The 35 'lux is already unacceptably bazooka-like, IMHO. A 28/1.4 might be nice, if they could keep the bulk under control (theoretically possible on a short focal length lens).

Consider also both VC 28's -- the 28/1.9 Ultron and the 28/3.5 Skopar. Both optically excellent and well made and vastly cheaper than either Leica lens. The 28/3.5 has the additional advantage of being about the most compact lens you can buy for an M; about like a fat body cap.

"I wonder if their 35mms are equally underrated?"

 

I think VC 35's are highly respected. I love my 35 pancake (old style) and can hardly tell the difference from my 35 'cron asph, and it is beautifully made, too.

 

I just wish the damn things were 2/3 stop faster. The 40 'cron C is an F2, and no bigger, and therefore maybe a better choice.

You have apparently not been on such a trip before. Let me tell you: it is not a matter of water splashing into the boat. You are half underwater the whole time anyway, and capsizes are likely. You do not want a Leica on such a trip. You could keep it in an absolutely sealed bag, but you would never take it out.

 

You want a Nikonos, or one of those disposable underwater cameras, and you will want it tethered very securely around your neck.

With the diffuser it's a GN 14 (in meters, with 100 film), so about 2/3 stop less. If you're using it on Auto or TTL, you won't notice this and don't have to compensate, but you'll lose a bit of reach.

 

The light seems to be a bit softer with the diffuser on so I usually leave it in place even with longer lenses.

The Jupiter (I have one in Kiev/Contax mount) is a fine performer by the standards of the 1960's, therefore, probably the equal of any of the Japanese LTM lenses, but not the equal of a later 'cron, Hexanon, or VC 50.

 

Probably a bit better optically would be either of the VC 50's -- 50/2.5 Skopar (a bit slow for a 50) or 50/1.5 Nokton (brilliant lens, but a bit bulky for every day).

 

If you don't need the speed of the Nokton, then maybe really the Hexanon would be the best choice. There's one on the bay right now, item number: 3804454059.

Dime a dozen on the bay, with the enlarger thrown in for free. These are great times to set up a chemical darkroom. Best deal of all is to buy a whole darkroom, lock stock and barrell.

No.

"I should primarily below 50mm. Would an M3 be a bad choice?"

 

No, unless you plan to shoot 28 and 35. If you're shooting only superwides, the built-in finder doesn't make any difference since you'll be using external finders in any case.

 

In case you plan to use 28's and/or 35's, an M6TTL or later camera with an 0.58 finder gives you usable built-in framelines for the 28. ANY M besides the M3 has usable built-in framelines for the 35.

If you look at it from purely functional point of view, then of course there is no justification for an MP. For that matter, from this point of view, there is no justification for any Leica. For $250, you can buy a brand new Bessa-R with a warranty, which is in many ways better functionally than an MP -- more reliable and accurate shutter, higher top speed, higher sync speed, better loading, equal finder (better than M6 finder).

 

So be honest with yourself -- you bought your M6 not because it is the best RF camera ever made (which it is not), but because it is pretty and pleasant to use. Otherwise, you would have bought a Bessa-R -- which as a "light tight box" is just as good or better than your M6.

 

This explains the MP. It is like the M6, but even more so.

 

Someone in the deleted thread made the analogy to getting groceries in a $60,000 BMW. Just so. You can get the groceries home just as well in $15,000 Honda. But the Bimmer is so much nicer.

"If I were shooting wide open in flat light, I can assure you I would get more in-focus photos using my EOS with 70-200/2.8 wide open on autofocus."

 

Doubtless! I miss focus a good bit with the 90 'cron despite my best efforts, even when stopping down a bit. It's tricky focussing long lenses on an RF camera.

If you're going to lug around a second body, you might as well use it. So buy another M6TTL if you can swing it. Maybe with a different VF magnification.

 

Otherwise, the R2 will do you just fine, just don't count on it for precise focussing of long fast lenses. Also, the shutter speed dial turns in the opposite direction from the M6TTL and you may find it awkward switching between them.

Theoretically, an SLR should be MUCH better with a 90mm (or longer) than any rangefinder camera. Why is it, then, that my Nikon (with two very nice long lenses -- an 85/1.4 and a 135/3.5) stays mostly on the shelf, and I find myself using my 90 'cron a lot on an M6?

 

It's true that it's much harder to focus a long lens with an RF camera. It's much harder to visualize DOF, and much harder to anticipate where the framelines are. These are the objective facts, but in my experience the 90 works well with an M, and this focal length is great for one of the best uses of an RF camera excels at -- discreet, available light portraiture -- and gives you a bit of extra reach for that use. I liked it so much that I bought an 0.85 body to use with the 90 (and 50) focal lengths.

 

The only way you'll know whether you like it or not is to try it. If you like your CL, I wouldn't trade it for something else. Just get the 90/4 Elmarit-C which was made for the CL (or a VC 90/3.5 APO Lanthar which is probably a better optic). The Bessa R2 has almost the same RF base as the CL so that wouldn't help you much. If you really like using the 90 with your CL but find you're having trouble with precise focus, then get an M6.

Any increase in VF magnification -- whether by using a higher mag body or by attaching the 1.25 magnifier -- will reduce the effective aperture of the finder and dim the finder. The aperture stays the same but the focal length increases, get it?

 

 

BUT -- the amount of light in a given frameline stays the same. So in practice, you will really see the 90mm frames better with an 0.85 finder (or 0.72 plus magnifier).

 

I personally find the 1.25 magnifier to be useful, but it does kind of poke your eye so it's certainly not perfectly conceived.

Another vote for the Voigtlander 90/3.5 Apo-Lanthar. It is indeed 2/3 stop slower than the thin TE, but so much less trouble. The thin TE is susceptible to spots on the rear element. The Voigtlander is probably the better optic, is cheaper, and can be bought brand new with a warranty.

Olivier:

 

The old Summicron is a wonderful optic which makes great portraits (and anything else you want that focal length for). But it is so huge that I doubt you will be very happy using it. I suspect that it is not a telephoto in optical configuration because it is longer even than my 135mm Nikon lens. It's about twice (!) the length of my 85/1.4 Nikkor and weighs a ton. It unbalances the M6.

 

I had one of these and got great images from it, but soon sold it to buy the later compact E55 version (just before APO-ASPH as someone suggested it). This is worlds better to handle. Should cost no more than a current Elmarit and has an extra stop.

Jeez, Michael, having fun was just what everyone was doing in this thread. Thank God for Al Kaplan.

At this point, someone should have chimed in with a polemic against electronic "battery dependent" shutters, but it seems that everyone with ecccentric, strong opinions has been banned or has left the forum.

 

I personally consider electronic shutters to be progress -- I have never understood why keeping spare batteries around is such a problem. And the M7 shutter is vastly more accurate and should need much less maintenance than the extremely inaccurate and maintenance-intensive mechanical shutter which preceded it.

 

Despite all this, I stick to my M6's, just for one reason: I hate the flashing, blinking, fussy, cluttered displays in the M7 finder. The M7 finder is just not quite in the spirit of Leica photography as I see it. And since the M6 is slightly cheaper to boot, so much the better (only slightly cheaper if you factor in a viewfinder upgrade).

If you mostly use compact lenses like the collapsible Elmar or the VC 28/3.5 (or are willing to put one of these on before storing your camera), then the best case for the M6 is the Leica Soft Case.

 

I have an older neverready case (made for the M4, I think) which seems to be bigger than the ones made specifically for the M6 -- it seems to have extra room on top for the separate meter. Nevertheless it is a lot better than nothing and I do use it. With the top part off, it makes a decent half case, although there is a lot of extra room around the strap lugs. The later ones which wrap around the strap lugs would probably fit better.

 

Mark, I'll take that case if Daniel doesn't want it. Anybody need a case for an M4?

If you pass through Moscow, go to "Foto na Kutuzovskom" -- a good selection of new and used Leica gear, at probably the best pricse in Europe. They currently have a couple of used 50 'crons for $300 and $600 respectively. The also have a 50/1.5 VC Nokton, new, for $400, maybe your best bet for a 50. They also have a bunch of Hexars and M-mount Konica lenses, including one of the scarce 21-35 dual focus lenses.

 

http://www.kutuzov-photo.ru/

Matt, I mailed you offline a list of photo gear dealers in Kiev. You will find the pickings pretty slim there for used gear. The price of a new 'cron will be about the same as in Western Europe. Here in Moscow it's a different story -- are you coming through here?

 

You'd be better off buying a Industar 50/3.5 collapsible in Leica thread mount, which will cost about $15 each there. Bring a LTM adaptor with you and you will be good to go.

 

A number of other Russian LTM lenses are worth considering. There is a good bit of information in the archives of this forum.

What everbody said.

 

The Bessa R is no smaller than an M6, but it is much lighter and for some reason much more portable -- I think it must be that you just don't worry about it as much and so feel better about just shoving it into your pocket.

 

The 35 pancake is the best "carry everywhere" lens -- makes the Bessa almost a real pocket camera. Are you fixed on the 50mm focal length? You could buy a 35 pancake and the wonderful 50/1.5 and be ready not only for walking around but also low light work, which is one of the other best uses for a RF camera. 35mm is a great focal length for walking around in cities.

 

The 50/2.5 CV lens would be a compact alternative to the rather bulky 50/1.5, but I don't think anyone on this forum has ever reported on it. It ought to be good, so you probably don't risk much trying it.

 

But for that money, you could get a user 50 summicron, which is nearly a stop faster. The 'cron cannot be used on the screw-mount Bessa R, but can be used on the R2 body, which as someone mentioned, is much less plasticky than the Bessa R. But it's also twice as expensive, and for me too close to the price of a user M6, which offers other pleasures (if no functional advantages besides the quiet shutter).

 

You won't go wrong with any of these combinations. If you liked your Canonet, you will LOVE either of the Bessas, or an M6.

"For 35mm BLack and White TTL fill flash indoor portraits with alor of available light, Leica 90 mm cron lens. What is the recommended settings for the SF20 flash in ttl mode?"

 

Answer: Off.

"I don't buy the flapping mirror argument, which is archaelogical BS from way back when 35mm SLR mirrors all felt like Pentax 67s."

 

That is a fairly unique opinion which, if true, would make all mirror lockup mechanisms redundant. I have never seen a handheld shot from an SLR as sharp at 1/15 as the post above. I have never seen a handheld shot from an SLR that was usably sharp at 1/8 or less. You can do this with an RF camera -- the difference is big.

 

Shooting a slow speeds involves some luck, as someone above mentioned. If the subject moves all your steady holding is of no avail. You have to shoot like you shoot a gun -- hold your breath, relax, and squeeze gently, but it can be done and is a very useful technique.

 

Most people would say that you get at least one and maybe two useful shutter speeds more with an RF camera.<div></div>

"If you´re happy with the quality of your summicron asph, nothing will satisfied you out of a ´lux asph, I just say this by references readen in this forum, you won´t get that wide open quality from any other brand included voigtlander, this also by reference."

 

I have both a 'cron asph and the Nokton (which is a double aspherical design), and I beg to differ. The Nokton is fabulous wide open, a worthy mate to the 'cron. It gives up nothing in sharpness or contrast. Some people say the tones are less "creamy", but I don't see it -- I think there is an optical illusion associated with the cost of the 'cron.