elijah_free

I have the Leica 24mm. It is an exquisite lens. It works well as a

set with my 35 cron asph. And with the CV 15 mm. I used to have

an older 28 mm 2.8. Really nice lens, but too close to my 35. The

24 is high in clarity and with beautiful contrast. I use it primarily

outside as a landscape lens. Has a great bokeh. I bought the

21, 28, 35 brightline finder from Leica. It all works well together

on an M6. when I go out to shoot in nature, I take along the 35

cron on a M7 and a 90 cron asph on an M3. It makes a great set

up. You can find your 24mm leica used for around 1300 to 1400

on e-bay or at KEH. this is an easy lens to find used in great

shape for a good price. It seems that many shooter buy one then

do not know how to use it. For me, it is wide enough for most

outdoor work. The mulit finder is good to use, for you can see

around your shot with the 21mm setting.

Both B+W and Helipan use the same exact Schott glass, so the

glass quality is exaclty the same. I was told this by the people at

Bear Photo in Palo Alto, Ca. B+W does make their own filter

rings, so there may be a difference there. Personally, I have

found both of these companies to produce the best filters. I also

agree that replacing a UV filter costs a lot less than replacing a

lens. HP is a really unusual company with a number of very high

quality European products worth looking at.

I know who you are talking about in Palo Alto. They are very over

priced in almost everything that they sell. Try Bear Photo in Palo

Alto and ask for Carla, the owner. This is one of the all time best

stores to purchse from. Alas, they do not sell Leica, but their film

prices are very fair. If I want to but a larger amount of film, I also

go to B&H on line. But otherwise, Bear photo is a great place.

Hi there, does anyone know for certain that the LC1 and the

Digilux 2 have the same exact on-board software? I have heard

yes and I have heard no. I know that the software bundle

included is differnt, etc. But it is the on-board that I am concerned

about. One review stated that the panasonic had a tendancy to

soften images more at iso 200 & 400 as a result of smoothing

out higher iso noise. While, of course, other reviews said

otherwise. The cost of the LC1 is around $1299. which makes it

a good deal compared to the Digilux. Or course, can I really live

with the camera if it does not have the red dot? Perhaps I can

just paste on a stick-it red dot, and it will be the same? That

price, by the way, is at PC Connection. Popular Photo this month

had an excellent review for the Digilux 2.

Has anyone had any experience with the 90mm macro for the M?

I would appreciate any comments on this lens and acc. thanks.

I wear a Maurice Lacroix, a Swiss made watch that is also

independently owned. It is an automatic with quartz movement. I

chose one of the lower end models without gold or diamonds. i

also chose this model because it cost a lot less without gold

and diamonds. Actually, I probaly wouldn't have worn it with the

gold and diamonds as I like plain and beautiful things that are

functionally superior without screaming look at me. Hmmm, I

wonder, what the next like Leica item will be.

So which digital Leica, etc. are you going to buy? The Digilux 2,

the new Epson RD 1, or wait for two plus years and buy the

digital M when Leica comes out with it? Personally, I would like

to find a time warp and have the digital M now. But, in reality,

cannot make up my mind. What are you planning on doing, if

anything?

My first lens was a 50 lux. I got the older version. The only

difference is that the newer version focuses down to around 2

feet while the older one down to around 3 feet. I do now have the

35 cron asph. When I go out with one lens only, which is often, I

take the 50. When I go out with two lenses, I take the 35 along

with my 90 asph. They make a great pair. For city shooting, I

really like the lux. The extra stop has proven great, and the bokeh

is really lovely. It also is tack sharp. Both lenses will let you get in

the face with your people shots. The 50 in the city has a great

perspective, without getting too much too often. Really, it is all a

matter of taste. You might want to walk around just checking out

your bright lines for a couple of days, setting up your shots and

seeing which one works best for your style of shooting. For night,

the lux is the one to use with a fast film.

Does anyone have any photos taken with a Xenon 1.5 that they

could post. I am especially interested in any shots wide open.

Anything else that could be added in terms of tech and shooting

data I would really appreciate. thanks for your time.

Your answer is to go to your manual that came with your 7 and

go to page 158 and read about custom setting # 1. This will

allow you to use a custom setting that will let you take a photo

while in AF that is not in focus. Minolta put a lot of very cool

custom settings on this slr. It is worth it to read about them. Have

fun!

I would like to add, that when I tried my first Leica two or so years

ago, the first thing that I noticed was the remarkable quality of the

prints. I scanned the negs with a Nikon scanner and printed

them from photoshop. It was very evident that the Leica gear

produced a superior image. Before I had been using top of the

line Minolta slr gear. I still do for macro work and the few things

that a rangefinder just does not do.

I cannot say that using a Leica made me a better photographer.

But I can say that when I began to think about my settings, I then

learned how to take a better picture.

Most of my work is in nature. I have found using a Leica an

extrodinary experience for this venue. The black and white

photos are as clear and sharp as medium format and blow up

large and clear. Now, those shots are some of my best. Due to

the beautiful clarity of the glass and the extra time that it takes to

set up a shot rather than just shooting away with an slr. I use T

Max 400 most of the time.

Does anyone else do that type of shooting with their Leica?

By the way, I liked the shots of your kids. Thanks for sharing

them.

I purchased one that had the same problem and sent it back. It

did not feel rigt to me either. My concern was that it would loosen

up more with use. I would talk to whoever you got it from and see

what type of help they may give to you with this potential problem.

the place I bought it from told me it was just an adjustement.

However, it has been a few weeks and I have not heard back

from them after my refund.

Have you tried the 54 MZ3 flash unit from Metz? It works

flawlessly with the M series. Supposed to work just as well with

the R. I have the model that has the swappable adapter so it can

be used with most any SLR also. Saves a lot in the long run and

gives you a wide set of features not available on Leica flashes.

Great fill in, bounce, etc.

I have not used either one of the lenses you have mentioned. I

use a 100mm 2.8 sigma instead. This is a very fine lens at a very

fair price. It is tack sharp with beautiful out of focus. You might

want to check it out.

As far as the difference between 90mm and 100mm, figure it at

10% difference. That will not really matter hardly at all, since they

are both a 1to 1 ratio.

The 7 is by no means a plastic feeling camera. herbert keppler

of popphoto oftens shoot with a 7. It is not a tank heavy slr like

the 9 which is very heavy. I think of the 7 as a very elegant slr.

Mine is over 3 years old and performs and looks like new. I

highly reccomend this camera.

The 7 is a magnificent camera. I have used one since they first

came out several years ago. The LCD screen on the back is

more helpful than you can believe until you get used to it. B&h is

the place to buy. Beware Adorama. they will lie to you through

their teeth. If there is a problem they just blow you off. I and

others I know have all had the same problems. B&H is not the

cheapest, but they are very honest and will try to please their

customers.

Thank you all for your wonderful and informative answers. I really

do appreciate the time that you all have taken. As a fairly new

member of this forum, I am appreciative of the genuine care

everyone seems to have in helping each other.

Has anyone used the Digilux 2 as of yet? I have read all positive

reports about the camera. However, I would like to hear from

anyone who has used one in real life.

I was told by a former sales person from Leica who now has a

camera buisness that it is not worth it. Yet, I still feel very

attracted to it as a first digital camera. I am a very happy M user

for some time, and do not really like the feel of a canon, nikon

etc. Of course I would like to wait for the R-D1 from Epson, but

not for 3500.00

thanks for your feedback on this great forum.

I have had my 7 for nearly three years now. The body looks

almost new. It has held up very well. Nor have I had any

mechanical problem with it. I do not know about now, since

Minolta has merged with Konica, but their repair turn around was

amazing. (Not needed on the 7) The LCD readout is incredibly

helpful, once you get used to using it, especially for tripod or

macro work. I recommend this fine slr.

Yes, I have had a bad experience with Adorama. I bought a used

Tamron lens several years ago for a Minolta. When i got it, it was

the wrong mount. For a canon. I called them and they told me I

did not know how to put a lens on my camera body. they were

very insulting. they did not want to take it back without an

argument, denying it was their fault. They had it listed on their

web site as a Minolta, even if they were wrong. Finally they did

take it back. They did not refund my postage either way and I had

to call they several times to get my money back for the lens. so,

yes, I did have a very hard time from them. Once they have your

money, their attitude is tough luck if they screw up. Glad your

experience was better.

With the price of used glass down these day, you might want to

consider the Minolta 28 to 70mm 2.8 zoom from e-bay. I bought

one used several years ago. It is a really fabulous lens with

remarkabl clarity and color rendition. It will cost you a bit more

than a third party lens, but if you are planning on using it a lot,

this is a very fine lens. I had a sigma 28-70 2.8 first. Very nice,

but no where as fine as the Minolta. I think Tokina is a piece of

junk. You will do better with the Sigma by far. The Tamron is a

big heavy lens that they have had trouble with the mechanics.

Again, you would be better to save a little more and pick up a

used Minolta on e-bay. KEH is a good place to but also if you are

not into bidding and know how to not to get ripped off. You will

pay a little more at KEH but they stand by whatever they sell. Stay

away from Adorama though.

If you do get a 24mm viewfinder, think about getting the 21 24 28

finder. Especially if you purchase a M3 which lacks a finder for

the 28. I have a 24 asph. and use this setup, but not on a M3. I

found this finder very good and with the wider setting, can look

around the edges to see what else might be lurking. Remember,

that none of these finders, and also the one on your Leica are

exact. The Leica being more accurate but not exact. The 24 asph

is a beautiful lens, and very sharp. if you do get a M3, try looking

for one that has been recently CLA (clean adjusted lubed) a

major tune up. I picked one up on e-bay that way. I use mine

however for the 90 or 135mm due to it's larger finder. I love it for

that. Just be careful shopping on e-bay. As you probably know,

all of the claims by e-bay about how they police their auctions are

a bunch of bull. Ever have a problem and they are not helpful.

Personally I love the 35mm. But that's only when I do not bring

along my 50mm. Sometimes my favorite set up is a 24, 35 and a

90. This seems to cover all the bases. I used to have a 28 for the

Leica, but found it was too close to the 35 to really make it

anything special. Sold it and picked up a 24. You need to use a

seperate finder for it to get all of your edges, but there is a nice

difference between it and the 35. For street shooting, I really

prefer the 50 thought. It all comes down once again to a matter of

taste.

Hi there, I an a Leica user new to the forum. I have been reading

it for a few weeks. Sounds great. I do have a question that I am

sure will be well answered. In regards to the tri elmar, I have

read pros and cons on both models. That the first does not click

in well at times, and that is a larger filter. Then I read that the

second clicks in too easily and can be clicked out and that the

focusing ring is too close to the body and one can accidently

push the lens disengagement button. Can anyone advise which

is the better or is it simply a matter of taste as usual? thanks,