warren_allen1

Hi All,

Just upgraded to a Nikon 8700 from a 990 (which BTW is still working fine and given over

50,000 jpegs for work!) One of the things I recall from way back when was when buying a

digital camera check for "hot pixels" by taking a high res photograph in absolute darkness.

I just did thuis with my brand new 8700 and while no white pixels there are many many

"dark grey" pixels. I've yet to print but the few shots I've done have no problem and are

quite spectacular. I'm guessing the 8megapixel file may contribute to this and since there

are so many it must be normal...or is it?

Thanks,

Warren

Leica will tell you it's their "rare earth" glass and perhaps they do have a

formula that rises above the competition. Some investigation will bear out

they are better than most as good as the others. My work shows an edge to

Leica but I may have progressed as a photographer and this may account for

the later-Leica work- being better.

All subjective.

One undisputible fact is the quality of the lens as a whole. Pick up any leica

lns and the equvilent Canon or Nikon and unles your a big fan of

polycarbonate the point will be made.

For some mind numbing technical specs try www.photodo.com

Some suprises there as well.

Warren

Hmmmmm....

I'm a bit suprised here. While I'm a devout Leica enthusiast I've always

heard that the Focotar 2 is over rated. I've not used one and am now

tempted to give it a try.

I have used the Nikkor, Schneider and Rodenstocks and found the Nikkor to

be more contrasty and sharper giving a better performance on my Leitz

enlargers. To be fair I compared lenses/prints done on Saunders VCCE ( sorry

I forget the exact model but the 4x5 size-very good enlargers) and the

Rodenstocks seemed to have the edge there.

Evidently these lenses vary due to the light source.

One good thing not mentioned is the fact the Nikkor lenses can be "clicked"

around once focussed and bring the apeture scale to the front. Essential for

the Leitz helical focus enlargers. I had older Shneiders and Rodenstocks and

don't know if the current models have this ability.

W

Summarit Swirlies are very cool!

W

Not to start a range war over:

"A Nikon is good, and the second-rank from the top brand companies"

but many of the finest printers insist upon Nikkor 50mm 2.8 for it's contrast.

I've found it has a bit more snap than the Schenieder or Rodenstocks I've

used and noticably so.

Perhaps the light source is to be considered but I've always been partial to

the Nikkor 50mm and Leitz Focomat or Valoy combo.

All a matter of style.

W

Hi All,

Weird question I know. I'm just thinking of adding some sort of cheesy lens to

my kit and while all the discussion centers on bokeh and tack sharpness is

the a particular M mount lens-Leica or other brand-that's noted for the

opposite effects.

And I don't mean just a less good lens but something more akin to a "Diana"

effect that would be cheap. ( I know that doesn't make sense but I'm only 1/2

way through my fist cup of coffee<G>)

In leiu of that does some one have a "battered" 21mm or 28mm or 35mm

that I could purchase for experimental purposes? I'd prefer not to mess with

adapters and want an M lens for my M6.

Thanks,

W

Hi All,

I have a great Timbuk2Designs courier bag - a PeeWee I beleive. Mines

waxed canvas which I don't see offered on their site any longer but who

knows...The still have 2 kinds in cordura but canvas is cooler.

Any way it doesn't look like a camera bag which is a good thing. Mines a

green and brown one so it's inconspicuous, no indications I have $2-3000 of

gear in it.

I've had the bag for over 3 years and it's still in perfect shape. I got it with a

added compartment. I don't bother with padding. I have others that get put

to more abuse that are over 5 years old and still show no wear.

I recomend these bags highly. No financial interest on my part just passing

along some info.

http://www.timbuk2.com

Warren

Black and white is much more dramatic IMO.

Warren Allen

Thanks for all the info!

A MicroNikkor with say a Nikon EL costs about $350 around here today.

Could probably find one cheaper but that seems to be the going price.

Visoflex's I have seenare in the neighborhood of $200-$300 and this sounds

like while it won't give me the absolute best or easiest in combo with a 50mm

Summicron, it may serve me well and simplify my gear. If small enough I'd

take it everywhere!

Thanks again,

Warren

Hi,

I had the 35mm and the .72 M6. For me it was too tight a fit if critical framing

were important. Plus the shade takes up the lower left hand side of the

frame. I considered the .58 as I had no inclination to shoot any longer than a

5omm. But instead I decided to swap the 35mm for a 50mm.

That's more a matter of style though as I like to be a little closer. The 50mm

is perfect for me as I like to see what's just outside the frame. 35mm doesn't

really provide a clear view. Frankly the .72 and a 35mm just don't give a

perfect view for me. I have to really push my right eye tight up against the

eye peice to see it all clearly. The 50mm lets me have my eye back a bit and

perhaps wear sunglasses.

Now part of Leica shooting style is based around it not being perfectly

composed in the camera.

Bottom line if I was dead set to get a 35mm I would try a .58 before

investing. Which is what I wish I did<G>

W

Hi All,

I answered this question myself by saying get a Nikon and a MicroNikkor but

in the spirit of keeping it simpler (we'll see about that<G>) what are my

options for a Visoflex and an M6 combo? I'm expecting a 50mm Summicron

and am curious if that would work.

Here's the deal I have a jeweler freind who on the spure of the moment will

want some photos of her work. I have my Leica with me ALWAYS and we tend

to do some portraits with the jewelry as well. But the purpose is closeup. 1:2

at least.

Despite my confusion I'm thinking it would be easier to have the Visoflex

than another camera outfit. I see a few on eBay but no information on what

to get and what lens combinations work with them.

A nice simple unanimous answer would suit me fine.

Thanks,

warren Allen

Hi,

I shoot mainly without a filter but always have a red and yellow with me if I

want some contrast. I used to have some Leica filters which as mentioned

above were great! Very strong looked like brand new for as long as I had

them and I bought them loosley out of a box full at an old camera store. The

B+W amd Heliopans are also good but do show some cleaning marks in short

order.

As I understand and has been alluded to already B+W and Heliopan are cut/

ground from billets of glass with the color all the way through.

All glass is not created equal.

W

BTW..

I thought I read/heard recently the life of a cd regardless of the

content is about 25 years before noticable loss of data occurs.

What have you heard?

W

Hi,

Not trying to be provacative but your best bet is to get a Nikon and

a Micro Nikkor if your intensions are to have a an exclusive

closeup kit. A couple of extensions tubes and you'll have the best

there is for the price of the 90mm Macro.

But....

I'm looking for something to go with my M6 as well. 1:2 or 1:3

being what I need for my metalwork.

I'm curious of the new 90mm Macro I see it has, for an additional

cost-an 'extention with eyes. Has anyone actually used this lens

or another lens of this type? How's iot work without the eyes? I'd

be interested on how acuratly it focusses or actually frames the

subject.

Also..is there a certain Visoflex that will work with the current M's

ie M6 on. I recall a store that had a bunch of visoflex pieces too

many for me to make sense of so I passed.

Thanks,

W

Well..

I try..

I'll photograph anything anywhere. If I'm out shooting I have the

camera ready at all times. I'm easily distracted by shadows or

archetecture but love the classic street shot which for me is the

most difficult to get right.

Frankly..street photography is the single most difficult discipline

of photography. Winogrand had maybe 200-300 great shots but

exposed over 300,000 negatives so it's one in 1000 for the best.

One shot in each 30 rolls of film.

W

"And on ABE...ABE represents a lot of used booksellers. ABE

doesn't price anything. If there's a bookseller with a good price

on something, it's worth taking, if not, well..."

Absolutly! ABE is just great. I checked Egglestons Guide again

and it ranges from about $200-$700 depending on quality.

"Bikeriders" was fetching over $1000 I understand.

Also Amazon has links to ABE and other independant

booksellers. Click on the "used" link. I just picked up Ralph

Gibsons Ex Libris (sic?) for $7 this way.

Seems the price of books is dropping. A couple years back I

sold a ton of photo books and was getting like $100 for some J.

Sexton and good prices for everything else. I missed a couple

and repurchased them recently for half of what I was able to sell

them for.

W

" Instead, what I'd do is go to ABE,"

I recently, within the last year,saw Egglestons "Guide" for $650

on ABE. So......

W

Oh yea I meant to solisite some more suggestions. I'm glad

some of you saw through my ommision and are chiming in.

W

Hi All,

I just got the reprint of Danny Lyons "Bikeriders" the other day

and within the past few months reprints of "Winogrand" and

Egglestons "Guide" All favorites I couldn't find or afford to own.

Quality of all seems to be quite good. I also repurcahsed Bill

Owens "Suburbia" but this printing is noticable inferior to the

original although ythere are some added shots to even it out.

Just last year these would have cost you well over $1700 on

ebay to view. Now you can get all for about $100 on Amazon.

I'm still after a copy on Freidlanders "Like a One Eyed Cat" which

sold for $5 in front of me a couple years back and I've yet to get

over it!!@#$%$#!!

Winogrand and Eggleston devout Leica M'ers. Mr. Lyon used a

Nikon F and I'm not so sure about Freidlander but suspect Leica,

but it really doesn't matter..does it???

BTW...

Any Los Angeles posters have the chance to see Street

Credibility exhibit at LAMOCA Geffen? I just found it on-line and

am trying to get the girlfreind interested.

Here's the link:

http://www.moca-la.org/museum/exhibitiondetail.php?id=345

Has some gret stuff by Diane Arbus and a Danny Lyon

"Bikeriders" is the image on the page.

W

George asks:

Warren, what dilution and time are you using for your new Tri-X in

Rodinal?

I'm just starting with the new Tri- at 1:50. I first did a batch at the

-15% as Kodak suggests for it's developers so about 10

minutes. Next batch was 11 minutes with no drastic density

change. Most of the shots were in anticipation of some

experimenting and all kinds of subject matter from white rocks in

bright sun shine to more shadowy stuff. It all looks printable but

not as dense as I strive for and therefoe less grainy.

I think I'll go to 1:25 and start with 7 minutes as recomended for

old TX but am tempted to over develope a bit.

W

Hi All,

I've simplified and basically carry some Agfa 100 and Tri-X. I

use Rodinal with both but occationally use Xtol with Tri-X.

In the past I've tried Tmax 100, 400, Agfa 25 and 400, Ilford HP5.

Kodak 3200, TechPan and PlusX.

In combinations too numerous to mention with Tmax, HC-110,

D-23, Pyro, D-76, ( probably missing a couple) but am finding

myself after more consistancy....

Although I'm definatley finding the new TriX behaves differently

with Rodinal and have yet to get what I'm used too. Not missing

by much but I'm still working on it. In Xtol it's thee same to me.

W

"It might help to know what you are talking about"

It might help if you knew how to reason.

You don't think they all sprung from the same basic idea, same

company? You think all the technology was partitioned?

It's all optics at the heart, it's all glass. The history of Leitz/Leica

glass is the history of optics. Despite the fact consumer

throwaway camera litter the typical photo store and make 100x

the profit, thre is probably 1000x the knowledge invested in the

Leica lens.

Still the crux of the problem is a matter of a few millimeters as I

understand it. You guys think it'll never happen, I think it'll take

time like the SLR and a metered M and a Martin guitar with a

truss rod.

I'll use history as my road map, you can use anonomous emails

for yours.

"How bizarre, How interesing "

Dr. Raleigh St. Claire

W

which is M Upside-down

Oh Yea... I started with the old times.

Kodak recomends a 15% reduction in development times and

that would be about 10 minutes at 1:50 and like I said 11 left me

cold.

I will start some experimenting, increasing by 10-20% till I get

more to my liking.

I'm a little suprised as I'm readin the opposite to be true(less

time)

I have been using X-Tol to good results but it doesn't have the

grain I desire latley.

Thanks,

W

Hi All,

I just ran out of my Old Tri-X and have been shooting soem new .

I always liked the graininess of Tri-X in Rodinal and have been

trying the new with it.

If I shoot my film at asa200 where are you guys starting the time

and mix.

So far 1:50 for 11 minutes is not as fat as I like. But this seems

to be the quick concensous on the web.

I'm about to try 1:25 for 7 minutes but have some interesting

abstract stuff I really want to have some grain and contrast.

Any thoughts?

W

"Leica is small potatoes. Leica is not even that. Leica is a teeny

tiny part of one potato chip."

Lieca or Leitz to be more accurate is hardly small potatos. I was

showing a freind my Leica and he was amazed Leitz made

cameras! He works in the semiconductor feild and Leitz is the

undisputed king for his applications.

Run the numbers of Sinar or Zeiss against Tamron and you'll

find the same discrepenancy. There's more Hyundais than

Porches...what are you driving?

My point is many companies have come and gone over the

years in the optics feild. Compare investments and man hours of

design and redesign of the Summicron and a Tamron?

This is the investment I speak of. Do you think Leitz plans on

walking away from this? So far the crux has been " Not up to

Leica's quality" . Despite the tone of the email I highly doubt that

Leitz is throwing up there hands saying it can't be done.

W

Funny how all the folks tired of the discussion have to read it and

chime in anyway.

It can't be helped, we'd be arguing developers and HP5 V. Tri-X

otherwise.

Try this..Buy a scanner. You can continue to shoot film and see

if you like it. The scanner will always be usuful even if you don't

like digital photography.

I went digital about 2-3 years ago and found out I dislike it as a

personal means of expression. I do it for work so perhaps I've

burned myself out but I don't even have one single digital print I

ever made! I have hundreds and hundreds of silver geletin prints

that I can't part with.

Like I said you can go and spend $2000 and get minty M6 with a

50mm Summicron and have some left for an inexpesive

scanner. You will then have the best of both worlds.

I've yet to see a 35mm digital negative. I've made some 8x10's

but it's not easy and not that great.

W