fredlee70x7

Go with the 1329 which is very sturdy. I use it on RZ67II which is in the same weight class as LF and may even be heavier when mounted with long tele lens. Get it from Robert White to save huge $$$.

B+W MRC no doubt. Leica filters are single-coated as all know and they are actually made by B+W as OEM. So for less money you'll get same quality plus multi-coating.

 

BTW, B+W filters are of brass ring. If you want everything bears the name of Leica, I can't help you then.

I have the 150 Tele-Xenar which is a stella lens and I prefer it to the 180 Tele-Xenar. Despite the later is faster at F2.8, it's much heavier than the 150. Optically the 150 is much sharper (also better than the 150/4 Sonnar). However, it's only available as used and is rare to find one.

 

If you want one, check out eBay where there is recently a mint one advertised by Kurtland Photo in USA. Good luck!

I just acquired a brand new 1V and have used it for a week. Bad

thing happened that I dropped the camera (with the 135/2L attached)to

a concrete floor. The right side of the topcover has a 1/2 inch

crack and the hotshoe was bent. On the lens, the filter received the

impact and the filter glass was craked.

 

I took to the Canon Repair Center in Calgary, Alberta (Canada) and

the repair bill is US$380. What it includes is replacement of the

topcover/hot shoe, removing the filter ring (as it stuck)

and "complete overhaul" of the camera to factory standard.

 

Is the piece of metal worth that much? I ask what if I don't need

overhaul (as I checked the camera causally and it works as it was

before, i.e. focuing, exposure, film advance etc). They say no, the

price is the same no matter overhaul is requirement or not.

 

Any idea that I should go ahead and spend the price of a sharp 50/1.4

to fix the camera or I should live with the crack and just replace

the hot shoe mount?

Why not consider Rollei 6008i or event the latest 6008AF? With the add-on control unit, you can adjust exposure by 1/3 increments.

Hi John,

 

I have both the G2 and Mamiya 7II. You may consider the discontinued and cheap TLA20 which offers both TTL and Auto modes on G2 and Auto mode on non-Contax cameras. It has same guide number although bigger than TLA200 but still compact and fits on Mamiya 7 nicely.

 

If you need more power, I suggest the relatively small Metz 32M series which is fully compabible on G2 with dedicated SCA shoe.

Is the new M-mount 40/2.8 Sonnar HFT the same lens in the older

Rollei 35S/SE in the 70's/80's?

Thanks to Jack and Bill. Does the TTL/E-TTL work when the 1V is on manual mode? TTL only works on RX when it's on Av, Tv or P modes. Sure the 1V and 54MZ3 have more sophisticated flash capability than the Contax and my older Nikon F3 (sold).

I received the Metz 54MZ3 yesterday and tried on the 1V, which I also

bought last week. The first thing I noticed is the camera chooses

the shutter speed based on the built-in meter when in TTL/E-TTL with

Av mode while I set the aperture stop. For example, the shutter

speed was 1 second at F5.6. I fired the flash and the "ok"

light/beep was on confirming good flash exposure.

 

My question is: why the camera still use the long exposure time? I

don't want to blur the background which does not have neon lights or

so that needs low shutter speeds. I used to use a Metz 32MZ3 on

Contax RX which automatically selects 1/60 (or 1/125 when outdoor for

fill-in). The 1V somtime selects shutter speeds of 1/8 or even 3

seconds, depends on the ambient light.

 

How can I use the TTL or E-TLL with 54MZ3 on 1V while using a higher

shutter speed, say 1/60, 1/125 or 1/250.

Phil, juding from our second last pic (Tether Man While Inflating), there seems to have obvious vignetting, esp. the lower right and left corners. Wonder if the shot was taken at wide-open.

Has anyone played with this newer 28mm F3.5 by Voigtlander?

Interested in knowing how it handles and its optical quality,

particularly comparing to its bigger brother 28/1.9 ASPH.

The unanimous answer is to get the 'Cron. OK, gotta save for a few more bucks now! Thanks.

I'm hesitant on choosing one of these two. Price difference is

roughly $250 from my trustworthy dealer in Asia. I believe both are

superb wide-angle lenses. If not considering obvious differences in

price and max aperture, which one should have better handling?

 

Is the 'Cron considerably bigger and does it block the viewfinder

more than the little brother? I use a 0.72x body (may consider

adding a 0.58x in a couple of years)

This is one of the old and long debates but also my favorite topic. I own and use M6 (35/2,50/2,90/2.8 - all latest versions), G2 (21,28,35,45,90) and RX (28/2.8,35/1.4,50/1.4,85/1.4,135/2.8).

 

Without a doubt all these lenses are world class and very very difficult to find anything else that are of similar quality. Camera features aside, Zeiss G and SLR glass are every bit same as Leica M's except that at full aperture the M's definitely have an edge. So if you always shoot at apertures of 1.4 or 2, you'll better off if using the latest 'lux and/or 'Cron lenses which are expensive. If you prefer to shoot at 2.8 or 4 or smaller stops, any of the fast Contax/Zeiss lenses are equally good. If you want some focusing assistance, go for G2 (fairly quick AF) or RX (focus assist).

 

To me I enjoy both (or I should say 3) systems. Which one I use in a particular occasion depends on my mood and circumstance. Maybe I'm lucky that I have all these choices.

I just bought a 300/4L IS which also has the same problem. The mirror locks up with the battery check indicator on. After a second or two, the mirror returns when the shutter is pressed again. Sometimes the aperture display on the LCD panel and inside the viewfinder show "00", then the mirror locks up after pressing the shutter. I try the other non-L and L lenses, all without IS, and they all worl fine.

 

I wonder if the lens has problem or the camera itself has problem in using IS lens.

 

My lens is bought from overseas and wonder if Canon Canada will fix it. What's cost if they charge?

I'm confused. What do you mean by non-compatible with Canon E-TTL wireless auto system and Metz TTL wireless auto system? What are the differences between the two systems? Does Mezt wireless auto system offer E-TTL or just the TTL only?

 

I think the 54M3 has a second flash head will have more functions than 550EX. Am I correct? Can I use one 54MZ and one 550EX in combination via wireless slave control and get good results?

Thank you Pok, how does 54MZ compare to 550EX in terms of guide no., function etc? Which one is a better buy?

Which SCA model offers all compatibility to EOS1v or EOS3 just like

the 550EX? Can I use Metz 32MZ3 with this adaptor and still have E-

TTL function?

Thanks to Petr. Yes, 300 is not long enough for wildlife which is not my main interest either. Having said that, since I live in Calgary which is one hour drive to Banff National Park, I think I may come to situation whereas I will shoot some elk, moose or what not when I'm doing landscape work. Maybe adding a 1.4x will serve better.

 

Another question - how about the 70-200/2.8IS with 1.4x? If this combo equals the "lesser-good" 300/4IS, is it worth to pay extra and get the flexibility?

Excuse me if you've been bored by this kind of questions and previous

postings to this forum had already discussed the comparison between

the IS and non-IS version. However, there hasn't been a conclusion

so far.

 

I currently use Contax manual focus SLR and wish to add a long lens

in the 300mm range. I also want to get into AF world (late entry?).

The Photodo rating suggests the IS version is inferior but I know its

rating sometime means nothing.

 

So I'd like to know any recent user experience comparing these two

lenses. Also, even though if the IS is not sharper than the non-IS,

how does it compare to Zeiss 100-300/4-5.6 at same aperture and focal

length. What about same against Sigma 300/2.8 or Tokina 300/2.8, as

these are also my choices to get the long tele lens. Thanks.

I am not yet an EOS photographer but will be soon. I'm "monitoring" this forum before I make final decision to purchase EOS 1V and several prime lenses. Let me share my story...

 

I started photography as a hobby about 20 yrs ago at college and my first SLR was Minolta XD11 with 28/2.8 50/1.4 and 100/2 MD lenses. I didn't find any flaws on this fine system but as all my peers were using Nikon, I changed to FE2 later just to be "part of the group" and sometime shared my friends' lenses when going out together. The AIS lenses were great, i.e. 28/2.8, 55/2.8 Micro, 50/2 (non-AI), 105/2.5 and 180/2.8ED.

 

Later I got the F801 (N8008) and the entry-level AF Nikkor 35-70/3.5-4 and Tamron SP 35-105/2.8 to try out auto-focus. I was not impressed with both the image quality and the focusing speed. In the early 90's I stopped this hobby and didn't try any new/pro grade AF Nikkor lenses.

 

My enthusiasm on photography and camera re-surfaced a few yrs ago and particularily in medium format. I'm using Mamiya 6x7 (both RZ67 and 7II) for landscape. My interest in rangefinder, sparked by Mamiya 7II, led me into Leica M6 with 35/2, 50/2 & 90/2.8. I also sold most of my old Nikon gear (except F801, 55/2.8 & 180/2.8ED which are now for sale)and gone into medium format and Leica M, all are technological backward but excellent pieces of machine.

 

As I now find manual focusing very difficult on my 2 kids who are 6 and 2, I researched the modern AF SLR systems and debated myself on F or EOS. After reading and seeing, I'm inclined to Canon because of the superiorty in AF capability (USM) and the L lenses. I

m eying on 28/2.8, 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, 135/2 or 200/2.8 and 300/4L IS with 1.4xII. I use only prime (both for quality and size) and still yet to be convinced to get the 70-200/2.8L.

 

Although I'm not yet an EOS user, I guess I'm in line with a lot of ex-Nikon fans who switched to Canon for more or less of these reasons.

 

I appreciate anyone who can point out that I may be unwise to do so before I rob my bank account again. Thanks.

Thanks to Ashley. But the bulk/size of TLR camera and lenses are very different than the RZ. Is that backpack can also hold RZ's? I'm in Canada and haven't seen CCS cases. Is there a web site?

I want to add a backpack in additin to my Lowepro Rover Light for my

6x7 system, which includes:

 

RZ67 II body with waist-level finder,

2 120 backs,

50/4.5 ULD w/. hood,

110/2.8 w/. hood,

180/4.5 w/. hood,

Sekonic L-508,

Vivitar 285 Flash,

4 filters w/. plastic cases,

Mirror-up shutter release,

 

Some stuff that I plan to add in future are:

250/4.5 Apo or 350/5.6 Apo,

1 220 back (to replace one 120 back),

L-grip,

Winder.

 

My questions is: which Lowepro backpack will fit these with the

smallest dimension? From the catalog, the Pro Trekker & Photo

Trekker seem to be too big. What about the Photo Trekker Classic or

the smaller Nature Trekker? I appreciate some comments/experience

from actual users. Thanks.

Any comments on these two set up. Should I go for the first combo

which gives more flexibility at lower cost or the latter one not to

compromise quality?

Who is Ted and what does he do?