prime lens

OK, so it's a maximum of 511 pixels wide if you want the photo to be displayed inline -- if it's wider, the forum thread shows a link labeled "Large Photo Attachment."

 

You can also insert HTML code into your posting for inline display of images wider than 511 pixels.

 

Nice work, David. Keep it up.

 

-- Steve

Heather, et al --

 

Pardon me for sounding a note of correction, but the commonly-repeated folklore that the largest dimension of an uploaded photo on this forum should be either 500 or 510 pixels is patently incorrect.

 

Reading the posting guidelines indicates clearly that the largest WIDTH of an uploaded photo should be 511 pixels. There is no limit on the height.

 

Here is one that's 511 wide by 756 tall:

 

-- Steve<div></div>

Columbia Gorge at Multnomah Falls (Oregon).

 

I thought I had used a conservative hyperfocal setting. Everybody else was waiting for me, so I "must have been" in a hurry!<div></div>

I have been using the CV 75/2.5 Color-Heliar with a Bessa R2, and also with a Bessa T and the CV 75mm external viewfinder. I don't have any good examples ready to post, but I am extremely pleased with the lens (not only on its own merits, but also for the price).

 

It seems very sharp, clear and natural, with relatively "neutral" bokeh (aperture-shaped highlights are evenly illuminated, rather than having "bad" bokeh with bright outer rings and a dark center, or "good" bokeh with dark outer rings and a bright center). The colors are bright and clear, and I haven't yet noticed any flare, even shooting backlit subjects outside on a bright, overcast day. I have been using the supplied hood.

 

Focusing the 75/2.5 can be a little tricky with the R2, but framing is relatively straightforward. With the Bessa T, focusing is much easier because of the highly-magnified separate rangefinder with diopter adjustment. It's a hassle if you have to focus on something like a black Labrador retriever or a field of grass, where getting a clear split image is difficult.

 

Framing with the 75mm VF on the Bessa T takes some practice. You have to remember that the actual field of view extends below the bottom brightline when focusing at around 2 meters and closer. In landscape mode, I mentally move the whole frame down so that its top corresponds with the dotted parallax-correction line in the VF.

 

Inevitably, upward-tilted shots of converging vertical lines in portrait mode will show some rotational geometric error because of parallax, but that's the way it is with a rangefinder camera. Being unable to frame with compulsive precision helps one to be spontaneous and can be quite liberating.

 

This lens is generally quite highly-regarded, and I would recommend it heartily. It's compact, light, and relatively fast, not too difficult to focus on a camera with a relatively short effective rangefinder baselength (such as the CL, CLE, Bessa R and R2), and fills a valuable and otherwise empty niche in the market.

 

I think Kris's "dream girl" shot shows the lovely colors the lens can render. Jorge M. Treviño posted a really nice B&W shot made with the SLR version of the CV 75/2.5 in Nikon mount on this forum a few days ago: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009LxJ (sorry I didn't make a proper link).

quiche --

 

Try to find a lens cap that fits your new shade! You could check at Stephen Gandy's site: http://www.cameraquest.com.

 

-- Steve

Ian, Fred B. was referring to the external accessory "VC Meter" -- $145 or so new plus shipping. Some have complained about the ISO dial being too loose, and the whole thing being a bit clumsy to use. Still, it's an interesting option.

 

-- Steve

Steve, is your vision significantly different from "normal?" I am moderately nearsighted, so that I can just barely get through life without glasses.

 

I could never focus my Rolleiflex SL35 or my Olympus OM-2S or OM-PC well, especially in low light. I got lots of frames with the subject's face a blur, but with the wall behind sharp and clear.

 

I found I could focus a Nikon F3 quite well, and bought it. I eventually traced this fact to the standard -1 diopter adapter on the viewfinder eyepiece -- which matched my right eye well. (It would have saved me a bundle in lens replacements if I had figured this out in time to get an OM-4, because it has an eyepiece dipoter adjustment.)

 

If the vision in your focusing eye is quite substantially mismatched relative to the viewfinder of the Leicaflex Standard Mark II, that might conceivably account for the problem.

 

-- Steve

"Proctodont" -- is that a dinosaur with its head up its regretful posterior?

The same thing happened to me 10 years ago when I borrowed an M2. The retaining screw was loose, and the rewind button popped off (along with the the retaining screw and the spring that goes under the button). Fortunately, I noticed it at the time. The parts landed in the bark-o-mulch at my feet, and I was lucky enough to find them and put them back. I made sure to tighten the screw!

Beautiful, Doug!

Jay --

 

That's "supercilious."

 

I think the pot is calling the kettle black here: "Feeling or showing haughty disdain. See synonyms at 'proud.'" -- American Heritage Dictionary, Forth Edition.

 

-- Steve

Fall...<div></div>

Andras --

 

Not to dispute, but:

 

The Bessa R2 has metal top and bottom plates and a metal back, as well as brass shutter speed and rewind knobs.

 

Though Tom Abrahamsson states in his mini-review of the Bessa T his conjecture that the Bessa T has metal top and bottom plates, in fact it does not. Stephen Gandy states unequivocally on his Web site that the top and bottom plates are made of polycarbonate.

 

After examining the regular-issue Bessa T that I received yesterday, I can confirm this. The back is also plastic, as are the shutter speed dial and the film-speed dial. (The inner metal frame is the same on all CV Bessas.)

 

The Bessa T does feel remarkably solid despite all of this (noticeably more so than the Bessa L, by all reports). The separate rangefinder with diopter adjustment is great -- the spot doesn't move as you focus. It appears as if it will be a lot easier for me to use than the Bessa R2's somewhat peripatetic RF spot.

 

(I also got the accessory viewfinders for the 40mm and 75mm focal lengths. Wowie, zowie -- what a clear and bright view through these viewfinders! The 75mm gives a 1:1 image, which is way cool.)

The posting by Robert Johnson at the bottom of the following thread appears to me to be as authoritative as anything I've read:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007MMt

I love my GIII Canonet QL17 (it's the third one I've had). Though different from the Leica's cloth focal-plane shutter, its leaf shutter is about as quiet as anything out there (except a perhaps Rolleiflex TLR). It's nice to have flash sync at all speeds.

 

However good the 40/1.7 lens on the Canonet may be, the 40/2 M-Rokkor (CLE) has made me much, much happier!

NH John --

 

I really like your photo. It is strongly evocative for me. The woods have a "Hansel and Gretel" quality, through which the adult (presumably the mother) leads the child down the potentially dangerous, yet mysterious and enchanting, path of life.

I have now shot 7 rolls with my Bessa R2, and I haven't yet noticed rangefinder patch flare. I find the eye-centering problem somewhat bothersome, but I'm learning to deal with it (mainly by re-centering my eye for a final check if I have changed the focus substantially -- the RF patch moves with the parallax-compensated frame lines). In truth, I only have one or two shots with significant focusing problems, so focusing the R2 works well for me in practice.

 

The Bessa T is now on closeout for $175 from Stephen Gandy, and I really want to try it. Having a larger, stationary, round RF patch with 1.5x magnification is an attractive notion to me. I also find the rangefinder diopter adjustment quite appealing. Needing to buy accessory viewfinders is a drawback, but the large and bright external VF images might make up for that. The standard Bessa T is another step below the R2 in solidity, but it's hard to argue with the price.

 

As pointed out in today's thread about the VC 21/4, fiddling with an external case, VF, caps, and hood can be cumbersome, so having a second body is a nice idea. The CV bodies certainly don't feel like Leicas, but they are so much less expensive that I can consider trying things I otherwise couldn't. On the up side, I would much rather load a CV Bessa than one of the Leica III series, and it is awfully nice to have built-in TTL metering!

Further correspondence with Ricoh USA indicates that they plan to sell the Caplio RX ONLY to corporate/industrial users in minimum orders of 5 units, WILL NOT sell to dealers or consumer distribution channels, and ARE NOT interested in dealing with buying groups or groups of individual consumers.

 

All of this is to avoid having to give sevice and support to individual end users.

The newly released and very interesting Ricoh Caplio RX digicam,

which has a 28mm equivalent wide-angle zoom and an extremely short

shutter lag time, has not yet been distributed in the USA. (Sadly,

it doesn't appear to have much in the way of manual settings.) I E-

mailed Ricoh USA on March 31st to ask about dealers for this camera

in the USA, and just now got a reply:

 

---

 

Sorry for the delay. We will be bringing that camera into the U.S.

in 30 days. However, it will be available only from Ricoh in minimum

quantities of 5pc per order. We are not offering this camera to the

consumer channel.

 

 

 

If none of the big dealers bring them in, maybe we can get a group

together to encourage one of them...

I got an answer from Ricoh USA today! I am posting it in a new thread.

My GF hated it when she had to give up a phone number ending in "6669." It was easy to remember, and had "666" as well as "69!"

The first photo is beautiful pictorially and emotionally, Herbert. The light on the baby's face suggests the new world of experiences ahead.

 

I like the second one, too, because of the delicate sensation of repose. You could always bring up the facial tones in printing if necessary.

If you have an RF camera with a cloth shutter and the lens is focused at infinity, you might burn a hole in the shutter if you point the lens at the sun.

 

RF cameras with metal shutters are supposed to be free of this problem. However, the Yasuhara T981 / Phenix JG-50 has a shutter that leaks a bit of light and could fog the unexposed frame, so users of these cameras are supposed to apply lens caps. The Cosina Voigtlander metal RF shutters have a second layer to deal with this problem.

 

SLRs are supposed to be free of this problem because the mirror cuts the light down enough so that residual shutter leakage isn't a problem. I haven't heard of meter cells being burned out by the sun, but I wonder if some batteries have gone dead prematurely.

Our local hot-dog used dealer only takes nice Leica stuff and holds out for premium pricing, because he can move it at the shows he attends if he can't get good money for it in this little burg.

 

I read yesterday that "prices for used film cameras are in free fall," which seems to be true. Like it or not, we are in the midst of a sea change in technology, and the millions of units of working analog camera gear apparently more than fulfill the current requirements of the market.

 

Because of the curmudgeonly demographics of its market and its reputation for top quality and lasting value, Leica stuff may be the last 35 mm gear to fall victim to this phenomenon -- but the handwriting is on the wall. It's not a mater of what, but when. While early adopters pay the price of financing the development of new products, late adopters like me pay the price of seeing their top-grade older stuff becoming essentially worthless.

 

I'm trying to decide whether to virtually give away a bunch of my Nikon MF stuff, use it while film still exists, or wait to see if "they" bring out an affordable digital body that actually works acceptably with my old lenses. The D70, with no metering on non-computerized lenses, is a non-starter for me. What a pisser! At least the Pentax *ist-D works with the old Pentax K and A lenses -- score one for Pentax!

 

My problem is that I got sick of waiting for a digital camera that I liked, and decided to get a Leica copy and shoot Kodachrome while I still can. I am happier with the look of my rangefinder photos than I am with the results from my Nikkor SLR lenses, but getting them sold to buy more RF stuff is turning out to be difficult. I was incredibly lucky to get a believable price for the Rolleiflex 3.5F that I sold 3 months ago.

 

It's true that special-edition rangefinder issues do not seem to be selling well, including the CV Bessa T 101st Anniversary Heliar set. 3 years later, Stephen Gandy still has some. I want one, but it seems like an incredibly unnecessary luxury.

 

Computerized cars are such a hassle that I dream about the resurgence of buggy whips among the disillusioned, but there just aren't enough wagon wheels left to go around!

D.P. -- Thanks, that's a good one! Why didn't I think of that?