clyde_rogers

I've used both axis and base tilts, and prefer axis tilts for exactly the reason you describe---less refocus required. That said, both worked fine for me.

I also have used an Ebony 45s for the past eight months or so. I really like the camera, but must admit that I find the focal length range limiting. If the range of available lenses works for you, this is a strong, stable, light, quick to set up camera, with many thoughtful touches. Really outstanding, I now understand why Ebony has such a good reputation.

--Clyde Rogers

With the Mamiya (or any MF camera) you'll have wider depth of field at larger apertures (so

with higher shutter speeds) than you're accustomed to with 4x5. In my opinion, DOF

preview is overrated, providing only an impression of the focus. Use the lens DOF scale,

but select the lines for two stops narrower than the set aperture. At your distance,

parallax should be accurate enough (it is simple to displace the camera slightly if it isn't,

and the all-is-in-focus finder helps you quickly notice when it will matter).

With your wide DOF style, don't sweat the precise focus point so strongly. If you can't

overcome this tendency, use a ball head, loosen it to focus, and quickly reframe and shoot.

You may be surprised at how rapidly that can be done---remember, your vantage point

isn't changing at all, and the framing will allow for small errors to be cropped away.

Rangefinders can seem sloppy, slow and old-fashioned at first glance. It turns out that

for many they are anything but. Try it a few times before you give up on it. Trust your

first instincts. The Mamiya 7 may be the answer to your prayers.

What a great gift! The R9 will be a very fine camera to learn on, don't be at all concerned.

Personally, if I were going to pick just one lens, it would be either the 35mm or 50mm Summicron (3-cam or ROM). If I were allowed two lenses, I'd get the 35 plus a 90 (summicron or elmarit).

Have fun with the camera!

--clyde

Well, duh. Mitch has an excellent suggestion for getting information---Sean Reid's site (at

www.reidreviews.com) would easily be worth the cost to help you with your decision.

--clyde

The M8 is excellent, and it sounds like it would work very well for you. The 24 is a great

wide angle choice.

For lens coding, you probably could arrange a fast turnaround on milling your adapter

with John Milich in NYC. With air shipping, you likely could have your lens coded in less

than a week. See <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?

msg_id=00LUiM">

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00LUiM</a> for

details of my experience, both with coding and with John's codable adapter on the 15 CV.

--clyde

Oh, and James, I also got one of John's LT-M8 adapters. It's a very nice adapter with coding pits neatly machined into it. My CV 15 is now recognized as a wide angle tele elmarit on the M8. These adapters are expensive ($150), but are well made, and function exactly as they should.

Until later,

--clyde

Okay, the short answer is that John Milich does excellent work, send him your flanges.

I sent John three lens flanges (35 cron, 21 elmarit, and 90 cron) last Friday, priority mail. I

got the flanges back yesterday (Thursday) priority mail, so a six day turnaround including

shipping (John is in NYC, by the way).

The flanges are exactly as before, just with six small pits milled into them. The pits are

very cleanly and uniformly cut, likely with a CNC milling machine. The ends of the pits are

semicircles, while the Leica pits are more squared off. Otherwise, they look just like the

Leica pits.

I filled in the pits as described in Carsten's guide with flat black and gloss white paint last

night (it's what I had on hand), let it dry for an hour or so, and scraped off excess with a

box cutter blade. I used trimmed down 29 cent paintbrushes to apply the paint. I let it

dry overnight, and reinstalled the flanges.

One point---on many lenses, if you just tighten down the flanges, you get some slight

binding on focusing. Tighten the flange snugly, and back of each screw a quarter turn or

so. Then focus the lens through its travel several times, and without touching the flange,

snug up the screws, and then tighten them fully. This has made every one of my lenses

focus perfectly smoothly.

Anyhow, all the lenses are recognized just as if they had Leica flanges. The coding is

clean, professional looking and effective. Coding for three lenses cost me $75, plus $20

for insured priority return shipping (regular mail shipping costs nothing extra), and took

exactly one week start to finish.

Email jm at milich dot com for details. He's responsive, and his work is highly

recommended.

--clyde

John Milich also will cut those six little channels in your Leica lens flanges for $25 per flange. You fill them with paint based on Carsten's coding guide, and have a durably coded lens. You must remove, reinstall and code the flanges yourself (the removal at least is easy---I sent several flanges to him last week).

I'll post again when the flanges are back, and report on quality of work and time taken.

--clyde

I've used an R72 on an M8, and it's a great combination. I'm not an aficianado of IR film, so

can't make the detailed comparison. But the look in black and white is unmistakably IR, with

light foliage, dark skies, etc. It's easy and fun.

Some folks are posting IR samples on the Leica Users Forum, you might check there at

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/25587-yet-another-ir-pass-

attempt.html

--clyde

To be clear on why I don't expect it to be fun---I don't think you could get the rear element of the 43 close enough to the film to get reasonably distant focus. If it could focus even at eight or ten feet, however, Robert's thought of a dark cloth bellows could make for a fun afternoon.

I think this sort of thing would be more fun, though, with most any SLR 50mm (and, at least for me, used only on the M8). Then you'd be sure to get infinity focus, still have room to move it around, and have quick feedback on results (you could compensate for the unpredictable nature of focus and framing in such a beast).

And ditto others, if you don't want a project, or if all you want is another lens, getting the Mamiya to work on the Leica seems like too much effort.

--clyde

> If only people bother to read what they wrote...

I expect Robert meant what he wrote regarding barrel lenses. The 7's in-lens shutter wouldn't have to be used for timing the shot if you could get the electronic shutter to simply stay open (yes, that would require electronics). Then the 7 lens would act just like a barrel lens.

Stuart, a barrel lens is a large format/repro or other lens that can either be mounted in a shutter (like a Copal) or in a plain tube typically with an aperture diaphram (called a "barrel"). People have often used LF barrel lenses (or even enlarging lenses) on a bellows for macro work with smaller formats.

At the risk of naysaying, I agree that this combination seems unlikely to be much fun, but to each their own. Now maybe getting that beautiful 43 onto a funky 35mm body that could actually infinity focus it, and use the coverage for movements...

Later,

Clyde

The M8 is a sweet camera. Why didn't you get a Nikon FM10 or Canon Rebel when you got

your MP? You could've saved quite a pile of cash. Certainly the DSLR is a better value, just

like the cheap film SLRs were. But getting the best bargain may not be your goal.

I think the M8 is worth the asking price, and I would not expect an upgrade for at least three

years (and likely more).

--clyde

Just go shoot with the camera, and decide for yourself if and when these items matter to you. I find the color from the camera is typically excellent, and have decided I don't much care about the filters (at least for now). I'll get my lenses coded over time, but again, am happy with the results from uncoded lenses, and won't hesitate to use them.

On your 35 Lux, that lens should work just fine. I'd mess around with mounting it a bit more, or have your dealer take a look at it. If you get nowhere, consider sending the two in together for adjustment.

Clyde Rogers

If you do it right, the MF will blow away the 5D. Really. Detail and tonality to make any

Canon slink off whimpering.

That means getting a good camera, a lower speed film that you like (you may need to try a

few), and finding a good lab for 120 (they aren't as common as even a few years ago) or

processing your own film (another thing to learn). You need to get prints made at your

good lab (not cheap) or get a medium format film scanner (also not cheap---if you want

to really beat the 5D, a flatbed won't do) or have scans done somewhere else (a bother,

and not cheap). If you cut corners, you'll reduce the frequencey of that WOW experience.

You have to adjust your shooting habits---you can't shoot as quickly as you could with

your current cameras. You may not have AF (and if you do it will be slow) or a built-in

meter, and you'll likely have slow fixed focal length lenses (along with your slow film and

bulkier camera, it makes low light a challenge). Changing film is fiddly, and likely needs

to be done every 8 (6x9) or 12 (Hasselblad) shots. You must slow down, and you will

likely shoot far fewer frames.

Every now and again you'll get a shot that matters to you, and that beats any digital

camera by a fair measure. With the 5D, you'll get dozens of shots that you couldn't shoot

(in a practical sense) with an MF camera. The real question is which are the shots that

matter to you---I'll trade dozens of nice photos any day for one I'm thrilled about. But if

it is the 5D shots that you really want, you'd be crazy to use MF.

For most folks asking your question, the 5D is the right answer. But some will find MF a

very rewarding experience. The only way to know is to choose one, get it, and see how it

works for you.

Good luck,

Clyde Rogers

Dan, it is as scentific a test as someone started this thread over. It just doesn't show the

lopsided advantage for the 5D. I didn't expect the M8 to perform in low light as well as it

does.

I hope you continue to enjoy your 5D.

It is the lens I leave on the camera. I love it. My lens is uncoded but otherwise current, and I

don't use the cut filter. My M8 ISO 2500 noise test was shot with that lens, sorry it's so

boring and at 2500...

http://homepage.mac.com/xrogers/page1/page1.html

> It seems Leica has missed the boat on high ISO noise reduction. Surely you Leica fans

with well heeled wallets would expect better, yea?

> But you be the judge....see link:

Just as a counterpoint, I don't have a problem with the M8 at 2500. If you're not sick to

death of this already, see link:

http://homepage.mac.com/xrogers/page1/page1.html

Clyde Rogers

I have the CV 21 finder, and looked carefully at the Zeiss.

The Zeiss is bigger. The Zeiss is all metal (both case and foot). The Zeiss provides a huge, bright, clear, undistorted image. A gorgeous finder, maybe even worth the price.

The CV is smaller and far cheaper. The CV image is bright and accurate (but not as big and straight as the Zeiss), and is really all the finder I want or need. Unfortunately, it is plastic with a poorly "spring loaded" plastic foot (the foot has a cut on one side so it can flex a bit where it goes into the shoe---this weakens one side of the foot quite a bit). The spring loading on my finder broke while removing it from my M6 last winter. The foot is replacable, but I was unable to obtain the part from any source.

I thought about replacing the CV with the Zeiss, but instead machined a replacement foot from aluminum. If I somehow manage to break it again, I may pony up for the Zeiss just for durability.

On the Leica forum, Pascal Meheut (a longtime no-BS contributor) claims that his local store

has called, and his M8 is there---he's picking it up today. Unless another reliable report

comes along, watch this Leica forum thread to see who wins the bet...

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8297-my-m8-shop.html

I use a Mamiya 7 with a variety of lenses, and do some of what folks refer to as street

shooting.

The 7's 150 is a great lens, amazingly sharp, and totally unforgiving of focus error. I

haven't used it for street shooting, and never would. As others have stated, the depth of

field is too small, the focus is too slow, and the maximum aperture is too small (and even

if it was larger, it would make the depth of field even worse). This will never be a quick

shooting lens, so forget about it and move on.

The 7's 43, on the other hand, is a great street lens (and I'd expect the 50mm on the 6 to

be great as well). Depth of field is adequate so prefocusing works, and camera shake in

decent light isn't an issue. And wide let's you get close, so there aren't posts or

pedestrians getting between you and your subject.

You already own the 6, so get a 50, get closer, bond with the wide view (this is where

these cameras shine), and have a great time. Don't worry about whether or not a 7 is in

any sense better---for street shooting I can't imagine there's a big difference favoring

either. And you get that cool square format.

Don't worry about the meter either. Use the camera, tweek exposure only when you have

time and the light is significantly off, and see if it is a problem at all.

Try the folks on apug.org or michealandpaula.com (use the azo link to get to the azo

forums). A number of people there are using night vision for development by inspection

(and some for loading holders and such). They've found $250 monocular setups that

should do the trick, and can likely answer any questions you have.<br><br> Try these

URLs to get started:

<BR><a href="http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoForum/one.asp?

ID=6011&PgNo=&GID=6011&CID=2">http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoForum/

one.asp?ID=6011&PgNo=&GID=6011&CID=2</a><br><a href="http://www.apug.org/

forums/showthread.php?t=11232">http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?

t=11232</a>

I own both cameras, but only shoot black and white with the Mamiya.

The Canon's sharpness is indistinguishable in small prints (A4), but I agree with the poster

who says the tonality is different (but not worse). At 13x19 inch, the difference shows, but

is small---edges are still plenty sharp, but textural detail from the Mamiya seems superior

(although I've also found that adding a little noise/grain in PS makes them all but

indistinguishable again...). At A4 size the Canon is still impressive, but I prefer the

Mamiya.

The Mamiya with B/W film also works better in extreme light, but I'd expect the Canon to

beat Velvia's dynamic range (although don't know that from experience, so ignore me and

listen to those who've actually compared, someone will pipe up...).

All that said, if put to me today, I'd sadly take the Canon over the Mamiya. It is quicker

handling and more versatile, and the output difference between it and the Mamiya is small

(at the sizes I print from them). I'm tremendously fond of the Mamiya, though...

--clyde

The three aspect ratios are done differently on the lx1 and lx2---the widest mode (16:9)

uses the entire sensor, and the edges are cropped off for the other modes. I think this

approach is preferable. Of course, people who prefer a more square look would disagree.

I agree that reduced noise would be a good thing for the lx1. But not if it ruins the look of

the camera's photos, which is a cut above the typical digicam. If they can keep the lx1 iso

80 look at the lx2's 100 base iso, add 2mp, and maybe increase the raw shooting rate

(they claim is supports faster SD cards), this could be a very nice little camera.

And wouldn't it be great if that 1600 iso were actually usable? I expect it will be terrible,

but have to admit that I'm looking forward to seeing a range of raw samples.

Mine (purchased new) was perfect out of the box. Sometime during the first 4 or 5 years of use it went slightly out of alignment. I adjusted it myself (perhaps two years ago?), and it has been perfect ever since. The only tool I recall using was a screwdriver (and some loctite remover). While not as overbuilt as a Pentax 67 or RB67, it is not fragile.

Go ahead and get a new one and don't worry about the rangefinder. It is unlikely that it will arrive out of alignment (and if it does, it is easily fixed under warranty). It is an excellent camera.