matthew_silberstein1

Just get a 17-40mm. Beautiful color rendition, great 3D and subtle transitions. Works out

to be a 27-63 or something close to that. Move closer if you need to fill your frame. Btw,

the focusing is fast and you have weather sealing too. Enjoy Japan. Go with L glass.

Hi. I am thinking about selling my 3 year old Black Paint Summilux 50 and Black Paint MP to help finance

an M8. Not my only M, but one that will be hard to let go of. Life is getting more complicated for me

while my clients push for instant results. Digital is now a professional expectation. Anyway, I wanted to

prep folks on this list for this strong possibility. I have been a member for a bit and have posted plenty of

pictures and comments. My wife and I just had a baby and we moved to the SW from the Seattle area one

year ago. Lots going on and I am tempted make some changes. Three M bodies no longer make sense I

think. Btw, the 50 is a real gem. We seem to be using the 2.8 version more frequently due to size and

weight considerations.

Remember, "Charter Membership" concept only applies to those of us who signed on early,

taking a huge risk.

This is what they told me:

"The Charter membership will be honored for all users meeting the requirements. Yes you

do have to provide proof of purchase, name, time, place of purchase etc. Please write (sic)

lightcrafts.com if you have not already done so. You should get a response in a couple

days. We normally try to respond in 24 hours, but recently the mailboxes are overflowing

and we cannot guarantee an immediate answer.

In the meantime LightZone 3 has a 30 day demo period, so there shouldn't be any

emergency to get a new serial number immediately. You can use LZ3 now if you like."

I sent my info in using the address on their site.

Just an FYI.

Talked the nice folks at Light Crafts about charter members and the upgrade to the completely new and

revised Lightzone version 3.0. Was originally worried they were going to charge anyway, even though they

promised a lifetime of free upgrades. No worries. They are rebuilding their charter member database and

plan on providing the upgrade for free-as promised. I was told to send them my name, copy of the sale

(date, where purchased, etc) and that would speed things up a bit. Charter membership refers to anyone

who bought Lightzone on or before March 31st, 2006.

Big demand, small company woes. Btw, version 3 is a great looking / acting upgrade. I am impressed.

reinstall the app. mine works like a champ with my G4 powerbook running the latest OS X.

Also run your repair permisions function in OS X's disc utility.

Leo,

Consider a Summicron or Elmar. The Elmar is flat field with little light loss in the corners.

Inexpensive used or new. The Summicron is sharper-maybe too sharp. I own the Summilux

pre ASPH and an Elmar. Once had the Summicron. Sold it and got the Elmar instead.

Both are great, though the non ASPH M 1.4 is not as "technical" looking. More "artsy"

some would say. A trend towards higher contrast lenses makes the non ASPH M 1.4 look a

bit dim in outer edge areas, yet there is a look-a signature thumbprint-that stands out

with this older design. I am one of those who really apprecates the M 1.4 non ASPH's

fantastic grayscale rendering, risistance to flare and out of focus zone display. It also has

a smoother focusing cam. Both the ASPH M and Zeiss are better with geometry and micro

detail. The non-ASPH displays, when wide open until f5.6, a mild bowing at the bottom of

the frame. This can be cropped out or adjusted in photoshop. If architecture is your

main thing you might want to pass on the non ASPH. For people and landscape pictures

using limited depth of field the non ASPH is striking. All of these designs make for

superior results as long as you: select lower ISO for film and digital, prevent camera shake,

stay properly focused and nail exposure. - Good luck!

Both are great, though the non ASPH M 1.4 is not as "techinical" looking. More "artsy"

some would say. A trend towards higher contrast lenses makes the non ASPH M 1.4 look a

bit dim in outer edge areas, yet there is a look-a signature thumbprint-that stands out

with this older design. I am one of those who really apprecates the M 1.4 non ASPH's

fantastic grayscale rendering, risistance to flare and out of focus zone display. It also has

a smoother focusing cam. Both the ASPH M and Zeiss are better with geometry and micro

detail. The non-ASPH displays, when wide open until f5.6, a mild bowing at the bottom of

the frame. This can be cropped out or adjusted in photoshop. If architecture is your

main thing you might want to pass on the non ASPH. For people and landscape pictures

using limited depth of field the non ASPH is striking. All of these designs make for

superior results as long as you: select lower ISO for film and digital, prevent camera shake,

stay properly focused and nail exposure. - Good luck!

I have shopped everywhere in Seattle and find that Kenmore is super reasonable when it

comes to prices. I believe in supporting the local merchant if they do their job well.

Kenmore Camera is not perfect, but who is? Online should be of last resort-you take risks

with online even from places like B&H. Ask for Bob, the owner, and you will be treated really

well.

My vote is for Kenmore Camera, just outside of the Seattle downtown area. Bob and his crew

do their thing without attitutude. Decent inventory and great prices too!

Never mind. Point is missed and I am stunned by the displayed negativity, ego and overall

disrespect.

Mr keng-hor's stuff is nice. But it is like comparing a statue to a runner. As I mentioned at

the top of this page, this was my first attempt at fast action with a slow camera.

Obviously some of you are not familiar with the D2, the small sensor issues, slow focus

and the limited lens range. That's okay.

Some of you have problems with parades and local innocence. That is okay too. It is

cheesy and that is why it can be fun to record.

Mr. Rose, thank you for your question. I have shot a few recent events with a digital SLR

and have seen folks shy away. I notice the Digilux 2 acts "invisible" like my M cameras. I

can get up close to folks and not have them notice until after the shot. I love rangefinders

and was impressed the D2 could be used in similar fashion.

I find it interesting, Mr Santos, that you chose to be so negative in tone. Do you not

understanding my choice of camera along with its inherent weaknesses? I appreciate

your advice but please in the future do your homework a bit about the tools in use. And

you might want to even look over a member's other pages-in this case posted over the

years- to get an idea about their style, experience level, etc. Small sensors, even at f4,

have too much in focus. The only way to get a small digital sensor to mirror limited depth

of field is to shoot real close at f2 or 2.8 or buy a digital camera with a 420mm range. The

Digilux 2 will never have that f1.4 or 2.8 look unless I am inches from a face or using a

super zoom.

I do think wide lens variations and obtuse angle choices can be a weak crutch. I have

been an M shooter for some time, sold images, etc. 35mm and 50mm are my usual

suspects. I was only interested in sharing results from my limited,consumer grade digital

tool in a fast moving event. BTW, Photoshop issues can only be discussed in front of a

print-not a small JPEG slide show on a computer monitor (which is often not properly

adjusted).

I do not have issues with artistic critiscm-unless it is unreasonable and lacks tact. Wisdom

should not be cynical.

I will drink my glass of scotch and keep doing what I do.

I am posting a few images taken yesterday in Corrales, New Mexico. This is the first time using my D2 for

fast action. Only a couple of times did it hunt for focus. I noticed people were less apt to shy away when

using this camera. I got lots of smiles when pointing my D2 at folks. I thought the D2 did a great job.

My pics are full frame with little or no color/contrast adjustments. I usually shoot in RAW but the fast

action forced me to choose JPEG. Looks good to me though if any of you have comments/uggestions I

would love to hear some of your digital/artistic wisdom.

Here is my link:

http://web.mac.com/matt4c/iWeb/Site/Corrales%20July%204th.html

A few more shots of this romantic city this past April. Tri-x scanned in using a Nikon V Coolscan. I

welcome feedback of course.

http://web.mac.com/matt4c/iWeb/Site/Paris%20done%20Tri-X.html

Thanks-Matt

Thanks for your help with this. Downloaded the Vampire script and used Taco HTML Edit to

get rid of the reflections in my slide shows. Pretty cool though I wish there was an easier way

for those less adventurous.

Hi,

Been a little while since I posted pictures with my Leica M kit. Using Kodak BW400CN negative film.

Images taken last month and are of Lyon, France. I welcome feedback, though pardon the poor iWeb slide

presentation. Don't like the mirror image thing at the bottom of my pics.

Here is the link: http://web.mac.com/matt4c/iWeb/Site/Lyon%20in%20BW.html

Thanks!

I run my monitor, as set by my spyder callibration thingie, at 2.2. Hot highlights, yes.

Overblown, no. Dynamic photos.