shawee

dear ALL,

in the manual, ambient exposure is taken with a certain degree of bias

according to the focus point. To ease my explaining, i use plain terms

of "high", "mid" and "low" priorities.

In horizontal mode, when a local focus point is in use, the meter will

bias its reading to give "high" priority to the segment indicated by

the local focus point plus the bottom 2 segments, "mid" to the 4 other

segments surrounding the focus point, and "low" to the remaining 7

outer segments, making up the 14 segments. The manual explains this

clearly with a portrait in horizontal mode.

What about the bias if i were to hold the Dynax 9 with a VC in

vertical mode? Do i assume that the bias is now to the right-side of

the focus point in use?

Thanks for your contributions.

Since Canon lenses have the advantage of Ring-USM, 3rd party lenses

will definitely slower. So if i were to choose the Tamron SP 24-135

for its range, price and touted merits, to get the better out of the

screw-driven focussing motor on a camera body, are newer focussing

motor of bodies like N80 or Maxxum 5 be better than F4/90x or Maxxum

9xi/700si?

In terms of feature and ergonomics, most camera bodies are just fine.

How about the power of newer motors compared to older ones? The newer

motors are at the moment found on mid-price models like N80 and Maxxum

5. Are these faster than those of F4/90x and Maxxum 9xi/700si? How

about accuracy?

Thanks for the help.

My previous post on http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002iRx

explained the observation i had that led me to my guess.

In the link i tried to put up, i said that:

"When i was comparing a 35/1.4 and a 35/2 of 2 different brands of SLR lenses, i did notice that even at same aperture size, the 35/1.4 register bigger discs with out-of-focus highlights. More obvious when shooting at 1.5m than at 2.5m and when i took it to 1m, the character is hard to ignore.

That is my basis of choosing my next lens: 35/1.4 ASPH, no matter what others say about the 4th 35/2.

-- y.shawee (shawee@pacific.net.sg), January 22, 2002."

AP, your photo tells exactly the same picture i saw in my own test.

In my experience shooting test shots of 50mm or 35mm (both f1.4 and f2 variants), focussing at the same distance, i've found that when using the same shooting aperture, 50/1.4 at f2 has larger blobs of OOF highlights as compared to a 50/2 at f2. Same as a 35/1.4 at f2 against a 35/f2 at f2. my guess is that a 90/2 at f2.8 will give a nicer ("blurr-er"?) OOF background than a 90/2.8 at f2.8

However, at one stop or 2 down from maximum, the OOF highlights will display the shape of the iris formed by the aperture blades. Many like me don't like it.

M-Summilux ASPH 35mm f1.4@1/30 when focused at 1.5m has a different

OOF redention compares to M-Summicron ASPH 35mm f2@1/15 at the same

distance.

<p>

M-Summilux ASPH 35mm f1.4@1/30 with Superia-Reala looks different

compares to M-Summicron ASPH 35mm f2@1/30 with Superia200.

<p>

M-Summilux ASPH 35mm f1.4@1/30 freezes a face that's about to turn

away. M-Summicron ASPH 35mm f2@1/15 leads you to think it is not a

sharp lens.

<p>

M-Summilux ASPH 35mm f1.4 is more than just a faster M-Summicron ASPH

35mm f2.

Just to add, i believe it has to do with the dia. of the lens opening.

50/1.4 = 35.7 while 50/2.8 = 17.9

dear ALL,

<p>

sorry to get in this late. Just to say that my guess was

<p>

a=Summilux and b=Elmar

<p>

my reason was because the OOF white and black lines, on the right of

the right-hand-most empty pot, are "fatter". The more obvious ones are

those just below the inserted blowups of both photos.

<p>

i did mentioned before about my posting on:

<p>

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=007miX

<p>

To say in short, i felt that when shooting at the same aperture of

f2.8, the OOF portion of a photo taken by a 50/1.4 should be "softer"

than one taken by a 50/2.8 Look at the 3 blobs of white above the 2

plants. Just MHO.

Thanks to all. By referring to the white circle, am i understanding

correctly that the meter is seeing a percentage of the film area and

is independent to framelines selection on the viewfinder?

dear All,

<p>

a few questions related to metering. What is the metering pattern and if the metering pattern remains more or less unchanged according to the framelines, does that means if a longer lens is attached, i get a narrower metering area according to the frameline? Does that mean that if i'm using a 50mm, i can meter a spot by bringing up the 135mm frameline myself?

<p>

What i meant was if i'm using an SLR using center-weighted metering with a 70-200/2.8 zoom, i zoom in to 200mm to meter, say, the darker side of the face, then go back to 100mm to recompose and take the waist-up portrait of a person by the window. This is some sort of a make-shift fat spot metering.

<p>

If the meter is according to the viewfinder area, then it will be the other wat round, that is a 35mm will have a narrower metering spot and a 135mm will have a coverage of, maybe, the entire frame???

<p>

Apoloise that my post is ill-organised. i hope you guys know what i'm asking. Thanks in advance.

-------

"If the hood blocks stray light from a 50, how effective would it be

on a 35?"

-------

<p>

i believe it will be more effective, since it is deeper. When i was

using a EF35/2, the recommended hood was EW65. i'm quite sure ES65

fits just as well, but it was meant for the discontinued EF50/1.8mk1

so the hood became rare. i asked for a ET65 which was meant for

EF85/1.8 and when i checked the edges through a 1n, i saw no

vignetting at all. It looks Impressive when this mis-match are on

camera but funny by themselves because the hood is longer than the

physical length of the lens. BTW ET65 is shared also by 100/2 and

135/2.8SF.

<p>

Now having a 35LuxASPH, i leave the plastic hood and its hood cap at

home and attach a generic 46mm rubber collapsible hood which is much

deeper to offer better shielding. At f2.8 the darkening of corners

sharpens to tell of an inappropriate hood in use. At f1.4 it is soft

to the effect that is Noct-like. Moreover the rubber hood is so much

more affordable to replace than Leica's original hood/cap.

Through my use of a 50/2 and now a 35/1.4 i appreciate the seemingly

"balanced equation" as to exposure. For my case, it may appear i've

gain 2 stops. But the pain is when i saw a swinging head as oppose to

a still expression when i shoot candids at 1/15.

<p>

IMHO, apart from hand-holdability, 50/1 at 1/30 may equate 35/1.4 at

1/15, exposure wise. However, subject movement can only be arrested by

a faster shutter speed. 300/2.8 freeze the ball in the air, IS/VR

can't.

<p>

Also, if one is searching for a kind of "look", then only that kind of

lens can cut it. When testing a 35/1.4 and a 35/2 SLR lenses some time

ago, i notice that at equal aperture and distance, ie. all being shot

at f2 at about 1m-1.5m, the 35/1.4 lens produced a subtly larger globe

of OOF highlights, possibly due to the larger entrance pupil. That's

why i'm very firm about getting the 35Lux when i decided to go M.

i'm using the ASPH35/1.4 to do environmental portraits and still-life. i usually shoot at eye level at ~2m for half-body or <1m for still-life at f1.4 to delibrately let a big portion of the background go out-of-focus. ASPH35/1.4 is amazing at f1.4 but how about the EF35/1.4L?

<p>

i'd like to take photos of babies and toddles at play. But they are just too quick for me to focus and recompose with my M6TTL. i always like to place my subject/object in the imaginary quarter of a frame. So i'm considering the easy way out, ie. to AF with selectable AF points. USM and motorised film advance make things easier too. In daylight, i may need faster shutter speed even with ASA100 film.

When i was comparing a 35/1.4 and a 35/2 of 2 different brands of SLR

lenses, i did notice that even at same aperture size, the 35/1.4

register bigger discs with out-of-focus highlights. More obvious when

shooting at 1.5m than at 2.5m and when i took it to 1m, the character

is hard to ignore.

<p>

That is my basis of choosing my next lens: 35/1.4 ASPH, no matter what

others say about the 4th 35/2.

i find RF better in telling if my body is shifting to and back from

the point of focus. Very obvious to tell if i've shifted out of my

intended point of focus. SLR viewfinder is not so straight forward to

me.

<p>

Am i right to say that even if the Summarit is about 2 stops faster,

the bokeh is not like the f3.5 Elmar, simply because of optical design

or the present of in-corrected abberation that era that LTM is special

for?

dear ALL,

i was advised to get an LTM 50mm Leitz to appreciate the nostalgia. Without the means of getting them all at one go, i'd like to ask which should i go get first? i'm looking at a dealer's coated Summarit and an Elmar Red Scale. Both clean.

<p>

my understanding when using SLR primes is that larger aperture enhance separation, as does the shop keeper in saying a (f1.5)Summarit gives better bokeh than an (f3.5)Elmar. But i also read that an Elmar, being an older design, does it better.

<p>

my use of a 50mm is mainly on "found" still life in close distance of about 3-5 feet, candids/portraits of friends & family from 5-7 feet. Aperture ranges from f2 to f5.6 for DOF reasons only, with no interest on subjective opinions like sharpness, contrast, resolution and the like.

i thought i've uploaded about 6 but only these 2 came out.

<p>

http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=399173&size=md

<p>

http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=399157&size=md

<p>

....... 1/30 at f2

<p>

By the way, how do i show a photo instead a link? (i supposed these

will end up as links when i hit "Submit"

http://members.aol.com/abreull/htm/08a.htm

<p>

.......explains plainly of this effect. Thanks David.

<p>

Is it possible to replicate such reminiscence without getting such an

old lens? Like maybe a 35/50 summilux or Nokton/Ultron. i'm afriad i

may be cheated due to my inexperience. How much should this cost? Does

it have RF coupling in M mount?

i've just started out with a Leitz 50 summicron 229xxxx for about a week. Shot a roll of NPH and Superia 400 each. Colour very much dependent on film used. Sharpness dependent on my handholding and focusing skill. When i'm up to it, the recorded details are amazingly fine, even at f2.

<p>

One thing i notice now that i'm using RF. i can immediately tell if my body is moving towards or away from my point of focus. i knew it happens when i'm still using SLR but could hardly tell by viewing through the SLR viewfinder. It is now so obvious in the RF window.

<p>

Among the keepers of these two rolls, half are portraits, the other half are shots of static objects at the distance of between 1m and 3m. i'm still trying to appreciate the way the Leitz renders OOF highlights at maximum aperture. They look not much better than the EF50/1.8mk2 or EF35/2 that i used to be using.

<p>

And then about the GLOW. What exactly is it? Is it similar to putting on the weakest soft filter where brighter area bleeds into darker area? If so, i'm thinking of getting the cheapest E39 filter, leave it out of the room to collect an even layer of dust and put it over the B+W protection filter.

i'm starting out with a black rigid m-50-cron 2295xxx. Its focusing ring is much stiffer than normal so i ask the lens to be serviced by their in-house techician.

<p>

First of all, i'm wondering if this lens can be assembled by hand without instruments that are as good as the factory. i mean to ask how close will the lens be to specs, factors like centering and alignment of actual focused distance to the distance marking on the lens. In an SLR, we see the image on screen so we may have a chance to detect these error.

<p>

Secondly, i'm not sure of the age of this lens but it may be more than 15 years. i hope to experience what i've read so far that older lenses is less contrasty and present better bokeh. Are these the effect of lens ageing? i'm using this lens with a 0.85M6 for portraits and candids of friends and family, both in- and outdoor. As i'll be using f2-2.8 exclusively, focusing must more or less be spot on, which brings about the first concern.

<p>

Lastly, since the lens is already old, i'm less reluctant to use it without any protection filter. But does a filter affects lens performance? "Get good ones, like Leica's" i was told. But i had a chance to look at one and its reflection reminds me of cheapo uncoated filters. B+W looks better. No offense intended. Just telling what i saw.

i like to keep my both eyes open when looking thro viewfinders, even

p&s like mju2. my eyes feel less straining so i'll less likely get

headaches. When i view thru a 0.72 with my right eye i felt i need to

handle 3 images: left-eye's, viewfinder's and rangefinder's. i've not

view thru a 0.85 becos the shop is out of stock for the moment. But i

can foresee the viewfinder's image being closer in size to what my

left-eye tells me.

<p>

Secondly, i'll not be recomposing much after focusing, 1.)to minimise

the possibility of focus shift due to change of actual distance

between camera and subjects, 2.)to release the shutter as soon as i'm

done focusing so as to freeze the moment. As such, most if not all

interest is in the middle third of the entire frame. These concern the

use of 35mm and the subjects are people i can get close with, or

objects that doesn't move.

<p>

Thirdly, if i'm out to be among the unknown, i'm most likely to take

comfort in the longer 50mm. That's what a 0.85 is supposedly thought

to meant for, lenses longer than 35mm. i hope i'm remotely close to

owning a Noct someday.

<p>

And i'm prepared to see my new M6TTL to last till then. i don't think

any real Leica user would tell me to give any Leica stuff up without

first improving myself.

<p>

i hope to ask while this tread is still fresh and noticable, if it is

worth getting a older 50/1.5 Summarit instead of the CV Nokton. i

heard of fogging and coating issue, and the fact that other than its

name sake, the Summarit is flare-prone against bright area and it's

not better in contrast and detail retention, when compared to a CV

Nokton.

i intend to go for a 35luxASPH after recovering from the eminent plunge to a M6TTL0.85 But for that time being (probably 6 months) i need a lens. i'm going for the much more affordable CV 50mm, as i've read in many articles that it is surprisingly good and compares favourably to 50lux. i hope to keep it as an occassional fast 50mm when i eventually get the 35lux to be my primary lens.

<p>

i'll be using the Nokton at max.aperture and at that aperture i'm concerned with the accuracy of focus. i've come to my own conclusion after using an SLR 35/1.4 that i'll turn a good lens into a soft one if it is even a little off focus. i've also read that it is not good to retrofit lenses other than Leicas on Leicas.

<p>

Please advise me on this RF coupling because i turn from SLR to RF hoping to improve my ability to focus. Is there a drop in focus accuracy leading to a less than "sharp" subject-of-interest? i also heard of a drop in resolution and contrast when the subject-of-interest is not in critical focus.