marek_fogiel

<p>You can get a screw in lens shade (possibly with a matching lens cap) on the bay - this lens shade will act as a filter retaining ring. I recommend this solution highly, because the pro shade makes it impossible to use the viewfinder, so it is only useful if you use the RMFX screen for focusing.</p>

<p>A good starting point would be the 75/2.5 Heliar - a real gem for the price, and you can make it show the frames you want through the use of correct adapter ( it is a ltm lens). Among the 50mm M lenses, the C Sonnar 50/1,5 is easily the most incredible portrait lens ever made. If you go for a 90mm, I'd get the first version Elmarit 90/2.8, which has a very nice rendering, particularly in B&W and is not excessively sharp. Another great portrait 50mm lens is the pre asph Summilux.</p>

<p>You only have M9, M8 and Epson RD-1 with rangefinders. </p>

<p>Seeing that you have settled on a 0.58x body and a 35mm lens, which I think are both excellent decisions in your case, I would like to point your attention to the fact, that in photography, particularly in B&W film photography, the latest and the sharpest lens is not always the best. If I had to go with one lens only, I'd make sure it is fast enough for all types of shooting conditions, so faster than f2.0 would be desirable. In terms of overall quality and flexibility, disregarding the price, the best 35mm rf lens for B&W is probably the 35/1.2 Nokton, which is the fastest 35mm lens made, but its evident drawback is the size. That would leave you with the Summiluxes - I have not used these, but from anecdotal evidence, the pre aspheric one, although tiny and held in high esteem by many for its pictorial qualities, is not terribly sharp wide open, and has problems with flare. That would leave you with the choice of either the old or the current (FLE) Summilux, and I think you should look around for picture examples to make your mind between them. (BTW, there is an almost new one on sale now at RFF). On the other hand, if you believe that f2.0 would be enough, then it might be a good idea to consider also the V3 or V4 Summicron, which are both better for B&W than the ASPH mdel, and are smaller. An odd choice, but a very interesting one, could be to look for the LTM or converted Nikkor 35/1.8. The lens is small, and from the photos I've seen the rendering is excellent. Have a look at various lens results here:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/</a><br>

And for the thread on the 35/1.8 converted Nikkor, read here:<br>

<a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94062&highlight=nikkor+35%2F1.8+converted">http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94062&highlight=nikkor+35%2F1.8+converted</a></p>

<p>It is in seconds, for long exposures in B mode.</p>

<p>The C Sonnar is in my opinion the best portrait lens ever made. I would go with the f2.8 version though, it balances sharpnes and background blur like no other lens of this FL. You can see my shots here: <a href="

<p>It is obviously a different way of making photography - for many it is a better way, but it has some big pluses and also some drawbacks, particularly if you need macro or tele work. As far as the lenses are concerned, beyond the Leica myth there is a simple fact that RF lenses of normal and shorter than normal FL are not retrofocus constructions, therefore can obtain a better and more uniform optical quality across the frame. I would bet that recent Leica lenses outperform easily any SLR glass of 50mm or less. In the longer FL, the picture gets more uniform. Leica glass however, has a different rendering than Japanese glass, and many people like using it if only for this reason, resorting often and on purpose to older, less sharp lenses specifically for this reason. You would be best advised to try it before you commit to switching.</p>

<p>For what you describe, actually the best rangefinder would be the Zeiss Ikon. It has the best viewfinder ever made, particularly friendly to a glass wearer, and the frames cover all the range from 28 to 85mm. It is also lighter than a Leica, which has its advantages on the road. <br>

An alternative "retro" approach would be to get the M2 and use it with a lightmeter, however, it does not have the 28mm frames. BTW, if you wear glasses, you would need to look for an M6/M7 or MP with a 0.58x VF in order to be able to see them anyway.<br>

Finally, given that you are predominantly a B&W shooter and like landscapes, you will want a high resolution low contrast normal lens, which is precisely the description of the Rigid or DR 50mm Summicron - the DR is heavier, and with goggles can focus very close, the rigid is lighter, but has the infinity lock which is a PITA - optically they are identical and absolutely superb. (the DR might also not mount on a Zeiss Ikon)</p>

 

<p>The camera looks good. I have he same model, as well as the 2.8F. I would simply say the following: this is a magnificent camera, even today, for B&W photography. If you are after colour, just stick to digital and be happy. If you do not need to enlarge beyond 6x, then you could just make it getting an Epson V700 with the Betterscanning holder. I find Rolleis to be great for ambient portraiture and landscape.<br>

<p>The camera looks good. I have he same model, as well as the 2.8F. I would simply say the following: this is a magnificent camera, even today, for B&W photography. If you are after colour, just stick to digital and be happy. If you do not need to enlarge beyond 6x, then you could just make it getting an Epson V700 with the Betterscanning holder. I find Rolleis to be great for ambient portraiture and landscape.<br>

<p>For saturated colour you need modern, higher contrast multicoated lenses. Old lenses can be great for colour, but it is ofter more pastel like. Have a look here:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/</a></p>

<p>For what you seem to like shooting, a Bessa R4A would be a good choice - 21,25 and particularly the 28 frames are great, 35 usable, 50 for emergency. In street photography it is nice to have a fast tool in your hand with a wide angle lens.<br>

Here is a slideshow of my photos taken with this body:<br>

As far as film is concerned, I would opt for gold standards: Tri X for B&W and Fuji Reala or Velvia for your landscape shots.</p>

 

<p>In the field of lenses, particularly 50mm and shorter, the mirrorless design of the rangefinders permitted non retrofocus designs and better irises (more elements for rounder oof highlights). On average, rangefinder lenses up to 50mm trump the relative SLR counterparts. I use both ZF and ZM Zeiss lenses, and although the quality is extremely high in both camps, the rangefinder lenses tend to be better balanced, i.e. have more even sharpness, less distortion and flare. An exception could be the 50/2 Makro Planar, which I find to be an overall great performer, slightly better than the ZM Planar, but this comes at the expense of bulk, have a look:<br>

However, the great aspect of M mount lenses, is the availability of a very wide choice of fine glass with very much varying characteristics, particularly interesting for B&W shooters. I own several 50mm rf lenses, and each has own strengths. It will be a long time before you will find your "ideal" 50 or 35mm lens, take it for granted. <br>

I would strongly recommend, that you start with a "benchmark" lens, like the 50/2 Rigid or DR Summicron (same optical formula), then you will be able to judge other lenses in a more balanced way. Pure sharpness is not everything, and you might be surprised how many people prefer to shoot with older lenses because of their unique rendering. Have a look in this group for comparisons:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/</p>

<p>Have a look here, for example:<br>

<a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/23838">http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/23838</a></p>

<p>Research Leica M4P and Rigid/DR Summicron 50/2. Start from there.</p>

<p>A cheap and effective entry camera/lens would be the Bessa R4A with a second hand CV 28/3.5 lens (plus the adapter from LTM to M). I would not recommend anything wider for a first approach with rangefinder photography. You should also ask yourself if you want to shoot B&W or colour, and what do you want to do with exposed film... You can have a look at my flickr photostream, and select a camera or lens to see the shots:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/</a><br>

Better still, you can look the lenses up in this group:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/</a></p>

<p>Maciek,<br>

1) Check the RF alignment - shoot a ruler at 45 degrees from 1 meter and see how much off you are, it should be no more than +- 1 cm from the exact focus point<br>

2) In the future avoid Kodak 400BW, if you have to shoot chromogenics, chose Ilford XP2, BTW, remember to expose all 400 ISO chromogenic films at EI 200.<br>

3) Get some Tri X ( or Arista Premium 400) and start developing yourself as soon as possible.<br>

4) Your Canonet is in the same league optically, as were the cameras of HCB, Capa, Ronis, Doisenau, etc... just go out and make great photographs !</p>

<p>Tri X in D76 and early version Summicron 35 or Rigid/DR/Collapsible Summicron 50.</p>

<p>You might consider buying an M4 - this is the latest "classic" Leica, considered to be manufactured without any cost cutting in mind. Mine looks like it will work longer than I will be around.</p>

<p>I have the V750 and CS9000. The CS9000 is grain sharp on B&W film, the Epson is not. In my experience, Epson is good for 6x first rate enlargement, the CS9000 for 12X, plus it excels in Dmax and colour reproduction. Decide for yourself.</p>

<p>For colour prints only, up to A3 size, just stick with what you have now, medium format film would be pure nonsense financially and from the point of view of flexibility. If you want to get something more of your camera now, try to substitute some of your glass with the Zeiss ZF lenses, in particular the 21,35,50MP and 100MP, you will notice the difference.</p>

<p>You should probably try to shoot first with a chromogenic film (C41 processing), which is very tolerant of exposure errors and easy to develop at any lab. In B&W I would go with Ilford XP2 and in colour with Kodak Portra 400. Expose both at 200 ISO and process normally. I do not recall if this camera has an exposure meter, if not you should get one which can measure both direct and incident light, and learn how to use it.</p>

<p>Putting Nikon lenses on a Leica M would have for all practical purposes no sense. Rangefinder M or screwmount lenses are coupled and in most cases are optically superior to Nikon/Canon SLR lenses, not to mention the smaller size. Look up older Leica lenses, as well as CZ, Canon, Nikon and CV rangefinder lenses. You do not have to spend a fortune to get great glass.</p>

<p>Putting Nikon lenses on a Leica M would have for all practical purposes no sense. Rangefinder M or screwmount lenses are coupled and in most cases are optically superior to Nikon/Canon SLR lenses, not to mention the smaller size. Look up older Leica lenses, as well as CZ, Canon, Nikon and CV rangefinder lenses. You do not have to spend a fortune to get great glass.</p>

<p>Start looking at rangefinderforum, the used CV 21 lenses turn up there quite frequently. </p>