karl_keung

there is also a meanful discussion at here:

 

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21474

 

 

together with a last tango with the 510 pixel rule.<div></div>

3. rigid summicron from the golden 60s.

 

 

 

the first two are shot wide open at 1.4, (or perhaps 2), can't remember now, the last one of

course at 2.<div></div>

1. asph lux 50, again, now in 510 pixel.<div></div>

2. pre asph summilux 50 (chrome version)<div></div>

1. by asph summilux 50<div></div>

they did not waste the mask left over from the LHSA MP3 job.

see also if yours can focus down to 0.7m. it started with M4, but I suspect some of those late

M3 and M2 are endowed with it too.

QG: yes, I am also moving backward to find out the real sweet spot of the hasselblad

focusing screen. now, what is your favourate folding hood and prism?

QG, yes, your last description is the most accurate one, in fact, I think the original acute matte is a bit brighter than the D type, it also has a wee bit yellowish cast than the D type. I personally prefer the acute matte ground glass type to the rangefinder/microprism type.

when I compare the 42165 with 42204, I see no difference.

but looking through the lens, both the original and the present D type look, to me, like the

same, i see no difference, or is there a very fine difference?

to me, the first generatikon actue matte screen looks the same as the now D type.

maybe leica should purchase more ebay stocks, it sure helps them make more money than selling camera/lens.

for its selling price, one would expect for more, a good eye relief is the only virtue that Leica should learn from, and as to the focusing patch, the Zeiss/Cosina sucks, there you have no eye relief: move your eye a bit away and the patch disappear altogether, and it has none of the MP snap and contrast. Remember, it is the focusing patch that makes the focusing easy and fast, the viewfinder is just for framing, not for focusing. It is a pity to see Zeiss has teamed up with Cosina, rather than Contax or Konica/Minolta. Well, can't blame Zeiss, Contax and Konica have all opted out now.

negative is too much dependant on the lab/tech that develop and print them in the end,

therefore good film does not translate into good results, in the same token, medicore film

does not automatically turns out to be bad either. negative film is the art of possibility.

thanks, and is there any sigficant different betweent the first generation acute matte introduced in the 1989 and the later D type introduced in 1996? and if i am to install one in a 500c camera, do I have to rip off the metal frame thus making it no longer useable on other bodies?

he seemed to like the 50 chrome distagon a lot, despite its size and weight.

hello, any users of beattie's screen? is it better, the same or inferior to the latest acute matte

D screen?

mine MP 29411xxx, must be with improved finder now.

mine was 2784521, seems to have a blue-ish color cast, since sold, so can't recall the flare issue.<div></div>

any views on this model, as compared to, say, 203 FE? thanks.

dear all,

 

I have an early 500c/m, want to upgrade to a bright split image focusing screen, but dont

know which one is the best around. I have read the latest one is coded 42215, also have

read Bettie etc, any suggestion/advice? thanks.

the new black paint on the latest MP sucks.

 

 

i will be sending three M3 to Luton soon, two for black paint and one for finder re-silvering and re-gluing, the whole finder prism has dislodged itself during its journey to me from overseas, this is the first i have seen a blacked out viewfinder.

Clay:

 

that is a really nice M4, but how come it has a release guard?

 

I also see Peter red paints the "Leica" in some of the repainted camera, do you know why?

thanks bill for the link.