ben z

I have seen lots of black chrome Leicas with silver showing through, from M4/SL up, so therefore both the brass+zinc+black chrome as well as the zinc casting+black chrome. I've never seen one with corrosion except I have seen many R4 with bubbles or pimples coming through but I was told this is something else having to do with bad quality control in the plating process. I have to suppose, and its nothing I can prove, that the way the zinc was alloyed it resists corroding. I'm sure that in a few years my black paint MP will be looking much scruffyer than my 24 yr old M4-P.

To Henryk: If it was me I would meter with both lenses at an empty wall which is all one shade, and see if the readings agree or not.

Since I have 28-70 and 70-210 plus 50 and 90 Summicrons for when I need the fast aperture (more for focusing than shooting as I'm finding that the R8 finder is just as grungy/grainy as my Spotmatic with the zooms in less than broad daylight)I was considering looking for the 35 Summicron as my last R lens. I was put of by Erwin's test result which indicates it doesn't ever really get completely good in the corners. I guess I'm going to have to try one myself as there seems to be a difference of opinion.

I never heard of the positive index thing before. How is it measured, from fingertip to fingertip with arms outstretched at 90 degrees to body? Just for laughs I asked my wife to measure my "wingspan" and its 72". Since I'm 66" tall that would give me a 6" positive index? Guess that's why I never have trouble holding a camera way above my head to shoot over a crowd of tall people. PS no, my knuckles don't scrape the ground!

I'm around 5'6" which outside of a few places around the globe (and my family gatherings) is on the short side for a man, and there have been times like at a rock concert where I momentarily wished for a few more inches until the 5'2" girl in front of me stood on her chair and I realized I'd need to be at least 7' to see over her anyway. But speaking of photographic situations, considering the geometry, unless I was using a wide angle lens and right in someone's face who was a lot taller than me, a few inches of height wouldn't make much difference to my shot. I recall reading an interview with David Allan Harvey who I take it is 6'+ where he said he often has to crouch down to be less conspicuous. I guess it depends on what part of the world you're in at the time. I'm no Spud Webb or Muggsy Bogues but even at my age and lack of shape I can jump at least a foot off the ground if I want to grab a quick shot over a crowd!

To John Painter: There's not a lot to a Leica so if you can't find anything glaringly wrong with it there probably isn't. If it doesn't have the "L" in the wax seal its probably been serviced in its life sometime. Things you can't see on inspection such as a light leak or mistimed shutter speeds should be apparent from a test film. There's pretty much nothing a good overhaul by Sherry Krauter or D.A.G. can't fix, most of it isn't too expensive in parts either, unless the winding head or the rangefinder itself are beyond hope and if there isn't signs of extreme use or damage those aren't likely. One thing to check that sometimes people miss, is the condition of the strap lugs. On the M4 and before models these get worn out and if they are about had it, its a lot cheaper to get them replaced with an overhaul than later.

To Tom: if the numbers are just getting dirty a Q-tip dampened (not soaking)with Mr. Fantastic or similar mild household cleaner should do just fine. Dab the Q-tip and rotate it into the markings. Sometimes the paint itself wears off. Fargo Enterprises (I think they are on-line at micro-tools.com) used to sell detailing supplies for restoring markings.

My corner store had one a few years ago and I tried it for a day it was very front heavy, hard to turn the focus ring (and needed to turn a lot to get from point a to point b), and the lens intruded into the viewfinder especially as the lens focused closer. The shots were outstanding though. I got a 50mm Summilux and eventually a 90mm Summicron late non-APO, both for less than I would have paid for the 75 Summilux. Those two are my favorite people shooting lenses.

I just got a very nice R8, 28-70mm, 70-210mm, 50mm Summicron, 90mm Summicron for just a hair over $2000, which is less than a dealer wants for a new R9. And all of it will be usable and hopefully hold its value or even go up if the digital module is successful. I think maybe the same will be true of the rangefinder lenses at least, unless Leicas digital for the M is a module also but I haven't heard that it will be. Lenses for Canon EOS and Nikon autofocus seem to be holding up too. Anything that can go forward into digital looks ok. Anything that can't looks like the market is considering it dead-end stuff. One way is to say you buy camera stuff to use and forget about what its going to be worth later. For us who like to horsetrade a bit we are thinking about resale value more than others.

If you can stand to go down one more notch in speed, think about the 28-70 zoom. From what I was able to research, it gives better even sharpness across the entire shot than any of the fixed lengths except the latest 28mm. From the several rolls I've shot with my new-to-me one, distortion at 28mm is not bad and at 35mm and a bit beyond there is none. At 50mm there's some pin cushion distortion but in terms of sharpness corner to corner and overall sparkle it's a ringer for the 50 Summicron which I've also got.

I probably shouldn't admit this publicly but I have always tied my lenscaps to the lens, even before they started making the Cap Keepers. Piece of fishing line (the braided stuff not the monofilament)through a tiny hole in the cap, knotted, the other end looped around the lens. Comes off in a jiffy if I don't want the cap dangling, but I've never lost a cap.

To Pierre: I can't give you reasons why should you buy one or the other but here are my reasons. I belong to the LHSA and enjoy the camaraderie and also the history and details of the Leica rangefinder. I appreciate the feel of a fine instrument (I have used Pentax screwmount for many, many years and the Leicas just feel more substantial, more finesse)and while the camera per se doesn't improve my shots, the morale boost/adrenaline rush (however you can describe it) does, of using a camera I like as opposed to one that I'm lukewarm over. I recently even got my toe into the Leica SLR field, but the R8 doesn't feel the same amount better than (for example)a Nikon F5 the way my MP feels better than (for example)a Contax G2. I bought an adaptor so I can use my wife's Canon rebel as a backup camera to the R8 because so many people have told me the R8 will give me trouble. Whether I will go for the digital module or just get a digital rebel will hinge on how well the R8 holds up between now and then. So far my wife has a digital Elph and for the small number of shots I do compared to a pro, I'm satisfied to shoot film as long as I can buy it. I haven't gotten into home printing yet, maybe that will influence me later. For now the Leica M is my favorite camera and I enjoy using it. Being able to see someone's expression uninterrupted by a flopping mirror is a real help to me.

One other thing, the 28-70 focuses 10 centimeters closer than the 28-90 and weighs only about 2/3 as much. For the person looking for the most portable, the 28-90 is a pretty hefty item.

I wasn't disagreeing Martin, you are right. In fact I pointed out in an older topic that I found the 28-70 was pretty close to distortion-free at around 35mm (you pinpointed it at 39mm). 70mm and to a lesser degree 28mm are another story. But the good thing about the lens is that the problem is only distortion and that is correctable in Photoshop. Thank goodness the lens is sharp and good contrast over the whole frame at all focals and subject planes. That's why I'm keeping the lens.

To Lutz: I made a topic several days ago here all about using Photoshop to cancel lens distortion. There is another program called Lens Doc also but you have to pay for it. Photoshop Elements which I got free with my scanner can do it. And if I can do it in a few seconds it's not too complicated either! The big problem would be for someone who wants slides for projection. They would have to scan, correct, save to a removable medium, and take it where they have a film recorder for re-outputting(?)to a slide again. But for me since I don't shoot slides its not a concern.

 

To Martin: Your math is uncomprehendible to me, its been 30 years since I squeezed through calculus-1 by the skin of my teeth, but the whole point to me of a zoom lens is to get a lot of focal lengths so if 39mm is the only place the distortion doesn't come up and smack you in the face I was pretty disappointed until I found I could correct it easily in Photoshop. Otherwise I would not have kept the lens. You may be right the 28-70 will be discontinued but it would be a shame because the 28-90 is like 3 times the price. I got my R8, 28-70, 70-210, a 50 Summicron and a 90 Summicron all for just a hair over $2000. Maybe when the 28-90 is used an selling for $1500 I might be tempted but probably not.

My perennial problem too, wanting to stay on a budget! Some points I would consider if I were your friend is that if he buys anything new, he will lose a lot if it turns out he can't get on with the rangefinder thing and turns around and sells. In contrast used Leica would not lose too much too fast. This is provided he doesn't get one that needs to be repaired! I got my M4-P from a neighborhood store just after it came back from Sherry for a complete service. Probably a late M6 would not need service but still I'd make sure it came from a store with a 60 or 90 day warranty just in case. In fact, if he bought from a place like KEH he'd have a couple weeks to try it all out before being stuck with it.

To Max: the 21mm and 24mm Leica SLR lenses are pretty huge for a rangefinder body. The 21mm takes a 72mm filter and the 24mm takes a 60mm filter and the shades for both of them are large rectangular jobbies. From all I've read not too many people praise the 24mm very highly. If it were me I'd get the Voitlanders. The 21 even couples to the rangefinder and both of them come with a viewfinder. If you check the prices they're cheaper new than used SLR lenses and the R to M adaptors aren't cheap either compared to the screw to M adaptors.

Henry: that's what I was afraid of (the heat and match etc.). You're a braver soul than me, I'll stick to gluing soft leather to the backs of the sliders.

Its been a lot of years since I did heavy duty trekking so I can't help but factor in my current lack of physical fitness but those lenses you have for the SLR (particularly the 100 if its the 2.8)are pretty chunky items compared to the rangefinders and plus if you aren't using a tripod you will really have to steady yourself to get sharp shots. If it were me I'd take the M and either 28, 50 and 135 or at most 21, 35, 50 and 135 to give me the most useful range of focals with the least number of lenses. And then I would take a second body maybe a Voitlander R2 or an M6 if I could swing it monetarily. Or at least some other camera like a compact point and shoot like a Rollei or Samsung with a 28-105 Schneider lens or something just in case the M7 decided to be uncooperative.

Sorry, I should have mentioned that the leather is only on the underside and slightly over the edge of the slider where it rubs the camera (left in picture), from the front it looks "stock" (right).

And this is what I did for my MP with the latest kind of Leica strap where you can't remove the plastic slider.<div></div>

The shrink wrap looks like a great idea, I understand it won't wear an M6 but they have plastic bumpers do you know for certain shrink wrap won't abrade black paint? This is what I did for my M4P and M4 but it only works with the older kind of Leica strap where you can remove the plastic slider to install the leather flap.<div></div>

To Ken Ng: Where did you get your information that most of Rolex watches use ETA movements? Their Tudor line are Rolex cases and bracelets with ETA movements but according to every authority I ahve ever heard or read, Rolex oysters still use in-house movements. I have been told that they have been cheapened over time and are not as good as they were (so maybe Rolexes are the Leicas of watches because Sherry says the same thing about Leicas!). I wore a Submariner for more than 10 years but recently picked up one of the James Bond Omegas from ebay, it does have an ETA movement but it keeps time as well as the Rolex.

To Gary: What about the picture quality of say a 16x20 made from the Pickerd and the Leica II? Would it be like the same between a Mamiya RB67 and a Leica MP?

I lucked out my new/old R8 does not scratch my film and its an early one before they started making a smooth area on the plastic scratcher part which I understand doesn't work permanently either. I was prepared to make a do-it-myself repair using polished tungsten carbide rollers but so far it doesn't look like I'll need to.