Jump to content

robert_hooper1

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,949

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by robert_hooper1

    Leica MP

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>I personally don't like T-Max. I find it way too contrasty for most applications. Some people like to experiment with various developer formulations or dilutions, and time and temperature processing to get the results they want from T-Max, but I have found that for general photography, T-Max is just too contrasty. In situations where you need contrast, (overcast days, old Leica lenses which inherently produce flat images), this is a useful emulsion.</p>

    Nikon abandoning DX prosumers - no affordable high quality optics?

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>I've kind of felt like the black sheep of the Nikon DSLR family with my D7000, lately. Not much being printed/posted about the camera, not too much in the way of technologically improved lenses for the Nikon DX format. I finally bought a Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 for my mid-range zoom because the 16-85mm is just too darn slow maximum aperture-wise to take advantage of the the D7000 AF capabilities. I had to sell my Nikon 18-200mm because it just couldn't hack it in the sharpness department any more with the D700, besides also being too slow. The only lens I regularly use on my D7000 which has a maximum aperture of less than f2.8 is my Nikon 12-24 f4, which I often combine with a tripod. </p>

    <p>I have a sickening feeling that the DX format is being fazed out by Nikon. Maybe it should be? I just don't know, anymore. After starting out with the Nikon D70, I just stuck with it. DX seemed to do everything I wanted it to. I hate the thought that Nikon may be putting designs for new high performance DX lenses on the back burner, or dropping them altogether. I'm happy I was able to recently get my new Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 as it seems to be an excellent match-up to the D7000 even though the lens itself is old technology. It's fast and sharp enough to keep up with the D7000. It would be nice if it had VR, but I've been doing okay without it. The Nikon 12-24 f4, Nikon 17-55mm f2.8, and my trusty Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF D is what makes up my walk around kit these days. It's heavy. Real heavy.</p>

     

    operation

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>If just a wipe of the lens and camera mount gold contacts makes a difference, I would swab down those same contacts with a Q-tip dipped in isopropyl alcohol. Sometimes those contacts get mysteriously gunked up with a greasy or oily substance.</p>

    <p>Good luck, Mike. I hope it's not something more serious.</p>

    Which Leica I Liked

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>I couldn't find a serial number on my old pre 1933 Elmar 5cm f3.5 either, Kent and I checked it thoroughly. However, after sending it off to Don Goldberg the invoice came back with a serial number of 139587 on it. I guessing there had to have been a number inside the lens.</p>

    Which Leica to Like?

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>If you stick with Leica pre-war and post-war cameras and lenses, Kent, you will save some money, as collectors have inflated prices for WWII Leicas, no matter what the condition. Before I sold my collection, I was very happy with a Leica III from 1936 and a Leica Summaron 35mm f.3.5, which is a fantastic lens, in my opinion. I finally found a nice price on a VIOOH finder, but before that, I would just guesstimate. </p>

    <p>Check ebay Leica lot sales under "newly listed items" and you can sometimes find a complete outfit for "buy it now". Send everything off for a CLA and you're in business. Keep checking several times a day and you will eventually find something.</p>

    Which Leica to Like?

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>Hi Kent,</p>

    <p>It sounds like you have your heart set on a Leica screw-mount body rather than a Leica bayonet mount body. Some people call these little gems, "Barnacks", because of the man, Oskar Barnack, who designed them for Ernst Leitz back in the 1920s. These cameras are smaller than the later Leica M film bodies which emerged from the German Wetzlar factory, after WWII. The later and larger Bayonet mount Leica bodies can use the screw-mount lenses intended for the Barnack bodies, with a an adapter ring, but the Barnack bodies can use only the thread mount lenses designed for them. Don't worry about that, there are thousands of fine Leica Thread Mount (LTM) lenses around, made, starting from the early 1930s, till today. That's right, you can buy a brand new LTM lens today with all the advantages of computer assisted design, and superior anti-reflective lens coatings. Or, you may prefer the, "fingerprint", or distinct signature images made from the very early Leitz Wetzlar lens production.</p>

    <p>Whatever Barnack body and Leitz lens combination you decide upon, just remember that these cameras and optics are very old. Regardless of outward appearances, I would have whatever camera and lenses you decide upon, be cleaned, lubricated, and adjusted (CLA'd) by a LTM body and lens specialist, unless the seller can provide written proof that the equipment has been serviced within the last few years. Working with Barnack bodies, with out of calibration shutter speeds, and lenses which are hazy and stiff from dried lubrication, can cause you a lot of unnecessary frustration from the very start. Better to have all your equipment repaired, serviced, and adjusted to factory specifications before you start what hopefully will be a new and delightful photographic odyssey.</p>

    <p><a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/ltmcam.htm">Here is a good web site to help answer questions you may have, or just to browse</a>.</p>

    135mm for portraits on M Leicas

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>Mukul,</p>

    <p>Forgive me, I meant the 135 Elmar f4.5 bayonet mount. </p>

    <p>Now look at it this way, James Lager must have liked the 135 Hektor or he has a wicked sense of humor. Leica sold over 70,000 of them in 27 years, (till 1960), so there must be something to like about them.</p>

    135mm for portraits on M Leicas

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>I've used various versions of both the Leica 90mm and 135mm M and LTM lenses. I've had the 90mm Elmar f4 collapsable, the 90mm Elmar f4 versions I & II, the Elmar-C f4, and the Elamrit f2.8 version I. Of all those, the Elmarit M f2.8, version I, was the best performer especially for portraiture (f5.6-f8), and the collapsable Elmar M f4, was the worst. Sherry Krauter calles this lens the best bang for the buck in the 90mm focal range.</p>

    <p>I personally don't like shooting with the 135 frame-lines. Plus, the 135mm Hektor f4.5 was the first Leica 135mm lens I owned and the worst performing Leica lens I've ever owned. I tried different samples of the LTM and M Hektor 135s, and the best performer was a real ugly LMT Hektor which made some nice portraits, but only at f8. All of these lenses had been CLA'd by the big names. James Lager assured me I would be surprised with the performance of the 135 Hektor f4.5 before I ever used one, and he was right, only not in the way I had expected. On the other hand, my experience with the 135 Elmar f4 was quite good. I had a bayonet model from 1962 and it was sharp between f5.6 & f8, and maybe f11.</p>

    <p>Then there was the 135 Elmarit-M f2.8 with the magnifier spectacles. What a hunk of Leica glass! I had the first version, (1972), and it was really a beautiful lens both aesthetically and performance wise. Version II is supposedly even better, but I never used one. You could buy these lenses in M- condition for about $300 less than ten years ago, I guess because they are huge, they were not popular. They are however, extremely sharp. This lens was just too big, awkward and heavy to keep in my camera bag, but I kept it in my collection until last year. I made a very nice profit on it, probably because it came with box and papers.</p>

    <p>If none of the above was interesting or pertinent, you can blame Mukul Dube who brow beat me into making a comment.</p><div>00aYi3-478035584.jpg.f2753a874750e33c3c746c7488fc5988.jpg</div>

    The Future of Leica?

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <blockquote>

    <p>I think that is the Leica that people have nostalgia for, but nostalgia is all that is left.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Very well said John Hawley, and the likely sentiment of a German tourist my wife and I met at a restaurant here in Honolulu, might have agreed with. </p>

    <p>She was traveling with her daughter and her daughter's boyfriend, and had worked for Leica at Solms for most of her life. Her disabled late father had started work at the Wetzlar plant since just after WWII ended. </p>

    <p>We were discussing the future of film photography, and of course, Leica film cameras. She thought film photography had passed it's time and Leica film cameras were being bought by wealthy people as expensive novelties items. Certainly, most of the people at Solms and in Germany thought so, according to her. She thought that Leica film cameras would not be produced for very much longer, and also that Leica would no longer bother to make Leica lenses compatible for digital and film camera bodies. The lenses for digital cameras were going to change. </p>

    <p>I asked her if she thought Leica would soon phase out film bodies and lenses at Solms and she thought, yes, probably so, but also, they would no longer be made in Germany, until film body and lens production stopped,altogether. She said the Solms facility was already too small. When asked if management ever informed the employees of the company's future plans, she said, no, that there was a traditional cultural vacuum between management and employees that extended back to the Wetzlar years. She said that even her father had several times been completely surprised by changes at the Wetzlar facility, even though he had advanced himself in the company before his death. He was still not high enough, nor in management, to be privy to such information. All in all, I was privy to some pretty interesting gossip, right out of Solms. </p>

    <p>Hope I live to see how it all turns out.</p>

    Leica Summarit-M Class of lenses 35mm, 50mm, 75mm. 90mm

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>Gus,</p>

    <p>As you know, I like Ken Rockwell, too, but this comment from his site regarding the Leica Summarit-M 50mm, is ludicrous:</p>

    <p><strong><a href="http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&sku=LC5025SMU" target="_blank">LEICA SUMMARIT-M 50mm f/2.5</a></strong> (low-price, unremarkable lens für Voigtländer und Zeiss kameras)<br>

    <strong>2007-today, </strong>39mm filters, 230g. 11 644.<br>

    <em><strong>I haven't used this new lens, but the other <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/summarit-m.htm">Summarit-M</a> lens I used had superb optical quality with sub-par mechanical quality.</strong></em><br>

    I wouldn't buy one of these. For less money you can get a used 50mm SUMMICRON lens of whatever vintage you like for one-quarter the price.</p>

     

    Leica Summarit-M Class of lenses 35mm, 50mm, 75mm. 90mm

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>This "Class" of Leica lens has came to my attention because of the relatively low prices I see them selling for and little to any professional reviews or opinions from knowledgeable individuals regarding any more than the acknowledgment of their existence. Google is not helping me much. It took me to Ken Rockwell, (second on the list), who had something to say about the Summarit-M 50mm build quality and performance without ever having held one in his hand. :-) I suspect that their genesis originated out of demand for an economically more reachable alternative for aspiring photographers, who having just entered the Leica digital world, suffered sticker shock when shopping for a kit of Leica lenses. This lne-up of Leica Summarit-M, though still expensive, may still have been preferential to a Leica optic over an aftermarket choice. When Leica came out with digital bodies, we all noticed the demand for, and prices skyrocketing, for Leica's prime lenses and just about everything else Leica.</p>

    <p>For those of you who can remember, this Leica class of lenses reminds me of the Nikon E series of lenses that were produced in the mid 1970s to give new photographers an economical hands up lens option, to get started in photography. Today, many of us realize these Nikon E lenses did not deserve the derision some Nikon snobs heaped upon them at the time. In fact today, some of the Nikon E lenses are justifiably recognized as having a few performance standouts.</p>

    <p>I'm looking for information about all of the<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/2007/8/3/leicasummaritm"> Leica Summarit-M class of lenses</a>, particularly the Leica Summarit-M 50mm f2.5. I really want to know about that lens. I would appreciate remarks from anyone who has done some shooting with the Summarit-M 50 lens, or can point me to a good review or two. Any information would be really appreciated.</p>

    <p>Aloha and mahalo.</p>

    PX625, Best Mercury Battery Substitute Solution For Use In Leica M5

    in Leica and Rangefinders

    Posted

    <p>Here is someone who was selling PX625 batteries until recently. The first thing to go was his email link.</p>

    <p>People have a point about about those darn CFL Light Bulbs. Most just throw them in the trash and a they contain Mercury plenty of Mercury. I guessing that Murcury CFR light bulbs contribute more contamination to land fills than, batteries ever did. Does anyone remember someone telling us CFL bulbs were supposed to last a lot longer? I think we've been had once again. The ones I get at Home Depot don't.</p>

×
×
  • Create New...