rmeskill

<p>Maybe it's just a personal preference-here's an example of how it washes out quickly when wide open...</p><div></div>

<p>Forgive me, I've been out of the States for a few years now but will be back for a month shortly-does anyone have any recommendations for a good cleaning for the old 'cron? Truth is it probably doesn't really need much of a CLA-it just could use to be recoated, which I know isn't quite as straightforward, but is there anyone doing that sort of thing these days? Slash does anyone really think it's worth it? It doesn't take bad photos at all, and I know it's meant to be a low-contrast lens, it just gets washed out quickly with any sort of in- or out-of-frame glare</p><div></div>

<p>Also posted this over on GetDPI, but thought I'd try here as well... I have a v1 Summicron 35mm that I'm considering getting rid of. It's a great lens, and mine's in excellent condition, but part of the highlight of this lens is its relatively low contrast, particularly wide open, and that just doesn't suit my style of shooting. Admittedly my copy has what looks like some coating loss, which I imagine doesn't help, but regardless I'm considering trading it up for a more modern copy. That said, I haven't paid much attention to the prices of things of late-are the old prices on antiquecameras still accurate? That is, would a 1-for-1 trade of a v1 'cron for a ASPH still be within a reasonable range if someone was looking for a v1? Sorry about the iPhone picture, but figured I'd better put something in for reference...</p><div></div>

<p>Well the urgency's over-the craigslist seller didn't find the need to send me pictures as it was a 'new' lens. Of course, it wasn't 6-bit coded, which would put it at 2006 or earlier, so I was a bit skeptical. In any case, he sold it because I didn't have a chance to get there last night, but I'm still curious of the relative additional value on a titanium lens if anyone's got some idea or rule of thumb...</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I find the CF case a little tight-I only put 3 filters in there to start and I was worried they would rub/scratch each other. Now I've got 4 in and I'm not *as* worried about scratching, but if I were to put a full 6 I'd definitely put a thin piece of fabric/styrofoam in between. In any case, it's still a great solution, I've just limited myself to 4 filters at once in a 6-card case.</p>

<p>I've either got a rough handle on or can look around forums to check value of most Leica lenses, but titanium ones are an enigma to me. Does anyone know what they're roughly worth in addition to a typical lens? I want to say 35mm Summilux ASPH (but not 6-bit coded) lenses would run around 3k, but what's the premium on it being titanium? I've got a local option to buy but don't want to overpay or under offer. And for that matter, how big's the resale market if I decide I don't like it better than my 35mm cron?</p>

<p>Listed it in the classifieds. I realize $1,500 is probably a bit high, but it's a gorgeous camera and I'm willing to entertain reasonable offers. Haven't posted the 'cron yet-they're a beautiful matched set but the question is if people would be more likely to buy them as a set or individually...<br>

<img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/P1060011.JPG" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/P1060012.JPG" alt="" /></p>

<p>Thanks all for the input. Still not quite sure where to start on the pricing of both of them-I'll probably just post them separately here and see what offers I get. Depending what I get out of them I've got my eye set on another M body and maybe a lens or two. They're both absolutely gorgeous which is why I picked them up, but not being a LTM collector/user they'd be lost on me...</p>

<p>So I just picked up an absolutely spotless IIIg on Craigslist. Came with an equally spotless collapsible Cron-I've never seen a LTM Cron with such a perfect front element before. I took it for a spin on one roll and the fast speeds came out spot on, on the slower ones the shutter stuck on some of the shots. Not unexpected having sat in a box untouched for the past 40 years-shutter itself looks good, no pinholes, will just need a CLA to get the slow speeds back in order.<br>

That said, I'm not much of a collector, I prefer to use my gear, so I'm trying to get a feel for what this is worth to see whether it's better to keep it or sell it and grab some more user gear to go with my Ms and let a LTM collector appreciate it. I'd love to keep the thing, but I have a feeling it's worth far more to a collector to put behind glass than it would be to me. Plus I don't want the first scratch to cost me hundreds...<br>

I'll post pictures later, but in a nutshell this camera is absolutely pristine-looks like it never left its everready case for the last 50 years. Even the push-on cap for the Cron doesn't have a single scratch.</p>

<p>Perfect idea BJ-just ordered me one from B&H!</p>

<p>So I'm on the hunt for a filter case for all my 39mm filters. I'd like to get a couple more, but I find it cumbersome to keep them in hard individual plastic cases and don't want to keep them in massively oversized ones meant for 77mm filters. Does anyone have any ideas of what to do? I don't mind if it's a creative solution, I'm just running out of room in my Pelican case and want a smaller alternative to store my filters.</p>

<p>Not sure the female thread is big (as in deep/long) enough for a helical insert, and I'd tend to agree epoxy might be a bit drastic. I'll try silver solder and see if that works out-at least I know I should be able to remove it in the future if necessary. That is, unless anyone out there has a junker (at the moment ebay seems to be remarkably short of broken/parts-only Kievs)</p>

<p>So my Kiev 60's feeder spool holder (the retractable metal piece in the bottom that lets you insert and remove film) seems to have stripped. Either the thread on the male or female end is loose and the part won't stay together, meaning I can't keep a roll of film in. Does anyone know if epoxying or soldering the piece in might work, or does anyone else by chance have or know where I could get a replacement part? I emailed Kiev USA, but haven't heard back yet...<br>

Thanks, <br>

-Ryan</p><div></div>

<p>So I'm considering getting a hard aluminum case for my Hassy kit (503, 50/80/150, 3 backs). I know Haliburton is probably the best, but I'd prefer to avoid spending $400 on one if at all possible. Are there any other high-quality but perhaps not quite so expensive cases out there that anyone might suggest? And if anyone has any experience in this department, what size might be required?</p>

<p>So I'm about to go on a trip up through the northeast, into Canada, and back through Niagara falls. At home I primarily do street photography, and in major cities I'll likely be doing the same, but along the way we're driving through New Hampshire and Vermont at prime fall foliage times, so there'll undoubtedly be a lot of landscape shots in the mix as well.<br /> At present I have a working M6 and a IIc that needs a CLA before I can use it. Most of my lenses are M-mount (35 CV, 40 CV, 50 cron, 90 elmar) and two are LTM (21 CV, 135 hektor, but only a 21mm external viewfinder). My question is this: I want two bodies for this trip, so should I find another user M or get the IIc CLA'd? Would just a 21 be worth it on the IIc (as well as perhaps the 135 if I got a second external viewfinder)? I figure it could easily be a dedicated wide-angle shooter, but I have a feeling I'm going to be loading it with different film and am not sure how I feel about locking myself to those two (or maybe only one) focal lengths for finishing a roll (I primarily shoot the 35 and 50).<br /> Thoughts? Now I just need to sift through the dozens of comments on what film to bring along...</p>

<p>I know this is a crazy relative and subjective question, but I found a IIIc on craigslist that appears to be in great shape. Serial 407xxx IIIc with a collapsible 3.5 Elmar that looks to be coated. It's sat on a shelf for years and although it's in great cosmetic shape will probably require a CLA and possibly a new shutter at least for the body, if the lens seems fine.<br>

I don't have a good grasp of what the value of an old LTM in great shape is-the seller's asking for $475 for the whole outfit-is that a reasonable price for IIIc in such great shape, or should I be looking somewhere in the range of 300-400?<br>

<img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/leica007.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/leica012.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/leica018.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://photos.ryanmeskill.com/leica005.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Ok, so let me start off by saying thank you to everyone who had a thoughtful answer to contribute here. I put some serious thought into it and ended up settling on 3 lenses, for better or for worse: 21mm, 50mm 'cron, & 90mm Elmar. The wedding was of one of my close friends, and while she had a professional photographer, I knew nearly everyone at the wedding, so wanted pictures of my own. The ceremony was outdoor, and I was just behind the family, so I shot a roll of Kodachrome with the 50 and 90. The reception was indoors, so I switched to mostly the 'cron and high-speed color/bw film. The 21mm was handy for group shots-I still need to finish developing the rolls, but I think I got some good shots of the flower toss and everyone dancing with the wider angle. I kept flash usage to a minimum, and ended up burning through 7 rolls of fairly unobtrusive shots. I plan on giving the bride and groom a framed shot or two from my b/w rolls as a more personal gift-here's to hoping I have a few good ones to pick from! </p>

<p>For sure I'd cross off the Hektor and I guess the 50 Elmar, but does anyone see a particular benefit in having the 21mm for the extra wide angle? I like the 90 for the reach, and would the f1.4 be better to have than f2? It is a bit smaller than the 'Cron, too...<br>

At this point I'm thinking the 'Cron and the 21 for speed and wide or the 40 and the 90 for the extra stop and the reach? Can't really use the flash with the 90, though, so the f4 limits me...</p>

<p>My friend is getting married today and I wanted to bring my M6, but can't settle on what lenses to bring. I've got a second lens carrier for the tripod screw, but I only want to bring two, just can't figure out what would be good for a wedding. I'm thinking most pictures will be group shots/action shots at the reception, but some at the wedding as well. I've got the following:<br>

21mm Voigtlander f4<br>

40mm Voigtlander Nokton f1.4<br>

50mm Collapsible Elmar f2.8<br>

50mm Summicron f2<br>

90mm Collapsible Elmar f4<br>

135mm Hektor f4.5<br>

I plan on shooting flash with low-speed slide film (maybe Kodachrome just because I need to burn through some), interspersed with some 1600-3200 black and white, probably with no flash, and maybe 800 color. I'd prefer to avoid the flash if at all possible, but don't think I'm going to be able to get away with shooting Kodachrome indoors without it, and don't want to just shoot black and white. My usual lens choices are a 40/50 and the 90, for speed and reach, but does anyone think the 21 could be useful in a wedding situation, and would the compactness of the Elmar be worth having over the Summicron?<br>

Thanks!<br>

-Ryan</p>

 

<p>So reading a few other threads here I came across the mention that the Hektor f4.5 135mm is not a true 'telephoto' lens, but rather just a long normal lens, got me to thinking. Telephoto lenses appear to compress the distances between objects, but normal lenses do not (at least not to the same extent). Since the Hektor is actually a long normal lens, though, is it reasonable to assume it won't distort the distance perspective the way a telephoto lens would, and would actually behave more like a standard 50mm with a larger image circle? I'm not sure how big the difference would be, or even how much it would affect a picture aesthetically, but I thought it would be nice to know...<br /> (On a similar note, I measured my 90mm collapsible Elmar, and it's also over 90mm from the lens elements to the film plane-is it reasonable to presume it also couldn't be considered a telephoto and likewise doesn't cause the distance compression?)</p>

<p>So I've noticed of late I get a single dark line on my 35mm negatives, about 2-3 frames in. A little investigation seems to indicate that it's the trimmed leading edge of the film touching a few frames back after being loaded into my plastic Paterson reel. This only seems to be an issue with 35mm and I think it's because of the way my cameras advance the film and wind it backwards, causing a backwards twist to the negatives. Has anyone else had this issue, and, if so, have any ideas what to do about it? I could try trimming off less of the end of the negative so it doesn't sag into the next track, or maybe winding it onto the spool the other way?<br>

Hopefully this makes sense-here's a picture of the affected shot:</p><div></div>

<p>I was leaning heavily towards the Thin Tele-Elmarit, given everyone's positive reviews, but with size and price as my primary concerns, I was still considering the collapsible Elmar f4. Despite the wretched quality of the collapsibles at my local shop, I actually found a E- copy at Adorama for $230, so I picked it up. Small, collapsible, great build quality, and the remarkable feature that it won't focus until you lock it in the out position-everything I've come to expect from Leica glass. Now I have to make sure the image quality is up to par, but the glass looks great, with no cleaning marks at all. I'm still looking more long-term at the Tele-Elmarit or the Macro Elmar, but for the time being this was an inexpensive way to get some good glass. Thanks everyone for the help!</p>

<p>So I've got a 21, 40, and 50 and am looking for a portrait/tele lens. I stopped by my local camera shop and saw some (very beat up) Elmar 90mm Collapsibles-I like the fairly compact nature of the lenses (and my 50's an Elmar, so they'd match), but am not if that's what I should go for. I'm thinking around 90mm is what I want-I have an 85/90 with all my other systems and like the length as a good all-around tele.<br>

I am looking for compact, light, and fairly inexpensive. Second to all those comes speed-wider apertures would be nice, but I think I'd be fine with f4-my 40's a 1.4 and 50's 2.8, so I've got speed there if I need it and I'd prefer my first tele to be compact over fast. I would have picked up one of the Elmars from my local shop to at least test out, but they were beat up-tons of cleaning marks and scratches on the front element and still asking $325. Thoughts?</p>

<p>Don't take this as a definitive answer, but here's the instructions on a Summicron, I imagine it'd be the same type of procedure on a Nokton...<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00CcwG">http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00CcwG</a></p>

<p>So I'm looking for a fairly inexpensive 35-40 lens for my M6. I have a Voigtlander 21/4 and an Elmar 50/2.8 Collapsible, and am trying to figure out what to get. I have the choice of a sub-$200 35/2.5 Color Skopar (LTM, non-pancake), a sub-$500 35/1.4 Nokton, and a just over $300 40/1.4 Nokton, all very very lightly used, essentially NIB, but can't make up my mind. Everyone's contacted me from the classifieds here, so some of you are probably reading this, and for that I'm sorry, I just can't figure out what's the best deal and which way to go.<br /> Seeing as I don't have any lenses with any really wide apertures yet I think I would probably like one of the 1.4s, but can't decide 1) if they're worth the extra money versus the 2.5 and 2) whether the 35 is worth the significant extra money. I know this is the Leica forum and I shouldn't be fussing over a couple hundred, but I just dropped a lot to start this kit and want a nice interim narrow wide angle until I can get a Summi down the road. Is the 35 that much wider/smaller to justify the extra extra ~$150, or is the 40 too close to my 50 to justify going for the 35?<br /> Any help would be appreciated-I just don't have much of a feel for the difference between a 35/40/50 and so can't really quantify the difference. I've always liked a 28/50 setup, but can do fine with a 35, and would definitely use it more if it was that fast and have never used a 40 before...</p>