andrea_taurisano

<p>One of my favourite 2011 shots. </P><p> <b>Link removed. Please use your profile page for your personal links.</b></p><div></div>

<p>Including oneself? <b>Link removed. Please use your profile page for your personal links.</b></p><div></div>

<p>Fred, I agree with much of what you say about that picture. It is suggestive, it does show relatively much action without anything being too distracting. And I especially agree that the contrast is "part of the content, rather than a style applied to that content". However, I feel that this is often the very point with street shots, especially if taken at night.<br /> Contrasts (including light contrasts) strike me every time I take time to explore a city with no hurry. See as an example this series of mine, but many others too: http://ilcimento.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/majorstuen-oslo/. Not often am I (are we) so lucky to witness an extraordinary instant. Actually I don't think I ever have caught one in a photo. All or almost all of my street photos are in a way duds or fillers, in that they show more or less effectively and suggestively life situations or instants that are at the same time pretty common and unique. But do those images please the eye that sees them? That's the question..<br /> Once contrast is accepted as part of the content, I'm not sure those higlights break any "rule", but rather become a useful way to communicate contrasts. Many of Moriyamas photos would look rather uninteresting (to me) if he had saved higlights and opened shadows. You'd definitely see many more distracting elements, which extreme contrast otherwise hides. But one point I dare try to make: I often see a tendency to overinterpreting, or overanalysing street photos. As said, everything boils down to whether a picture works or not, individually speaking.. ;-)<br /> <b>URL signature removed. Please use your profile page for your personal links.</b></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Mark, I really enjoy looking at your photos. There's a lot of American countryside mood your series, said by someone who's never been in the States, that is. Our Italian fairs look pretty different and you made me want to experience yours one day..</p>

<p>Cape Town</p><p> <b>Link removed. Please use your profile page for your personal links.</b></p><div></div>

<p>Keith, I guess you mean the 25P (am not aware of any CV 24 mm). You say you bought another lens mount "to have it coded and to bring up the correct frame lines". What framelines did this lens bring up as it came from the factory? Did it not already bring up the 24 / 35 frame lines as they at Cameraquest claim? thanks</p>

<p>hmm.. on Cameraquest's page it reads that the 25/4 P brings up the 24/35 framelines. But I'll ask the seller (cameraquest, again) before I place the order, to be sure. Thanx</p>

<p>Thanks a lot everybody. Now I have som more first hands information to help me decide. Although a 21mm (28mm equiv.) would be a better complement to my Summicron 35 (50 mm equiv.), I lean more towards buying the 25. This is because of the high risk of not feeling at ease with either having to guess the corners or use an external finder...</p>

<p>Cabs at Oslo central station</p><div></div>

<p>Hello<br>

I´ve read all I could find of previous posts but didn't quite find strong arguments for or against either lens. Mind that I'm talking about the new rangefinder coupled versions and that I do not want to consider larger, heavier and much more expensive lenses...<br>

Hopefully some of you have tried either or both of these CV lenses on a M8 / M8.2 and can give feedback on the following points. I believe this would be useful to other users who stand in front of a choice.<br>

1) can the CV 21/4 P be used om a M8 without external finder (if one doesn't wear glasses, that is) or does is in practice just get too tiring to move your eyes around to see the edges of the viewfinder?<br>

2) what brightlines does the 21/4 P bring out on a M8?<br>

3) the 25/4 P brings out the 24 / 35 brightlines on a M8 and will work fine without external finder. Would this still be usable without external finder on a M9 (just in case I should sell my house and by one in the future..;-) ?<br>

4) How does the optical quality of the 21/4P and 25/4P compare in real life?<br>

5) I just don't fully understand this coding thing. Can either the 21/4 P or the 25/4 P be used uncoded without major problems? I mean shouldn't much of vignetting disappear as a result of crop factor? Here in Norway I may not be able to get the lens coded (unless cameraquest, who sells them on ebay, can send it to me already coded)<br>

I very much appreciate any feedback. Fine if you can only write about either lens, I'll put the pieces together in my mind..<br>

Andrea</p>

<p><em>"One with 28mm extreme-wide-angle"</em><br>

<br /> <em>I wonder what he'd have called a CV 12mm ;-)<br /> </em></p>

<p>Gary, cool shot. It's so Italy! </p><div></div>

<p>"If I knew how to take a good photograph, I'd do it all the time"<a title="http://www.gabrielelopez.org" onclick="window.open(this.href); return false;" onkeypress="window.open(this.href); return false;" href="http://www.gabrielelopez.org/" title="http://www.gabrielelopez.org" >.</a> Robert Doisneau</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

you may want to take a look at my website, section "XPanded street". Sounds like what you describe (which doesn't mean you have to like it of course)<br>

www.at-photography.net</p>

<p>..</p><div></div>

<p>sorry, no Leica this time, but they fit the subject..</p><div></div>

<p>Randy, reading the two user reviews at the very link you gave me, it sounds like you were lucky with your third party battery. Both reviewers had terrible experiences... There seem to be much random performance here, and since the price of your battery is almost half the price of an original battery, it may quickly turn out more expensive to give the third party a try, if it doesn't work out as hoped... thanks for your answers anyway!</p>

<p>John, your post kind of mitigates my enthusiasm, but am glad you posted it. Sounds like your issues at least didn't damage your M8... And it proves that what Leica claims about issues with third party batteries isn't only to sell their own batteries. </p>

<p>Thanks a lot, Randy. I think I'll give your battery a try (it delivers 1900 mA like the original LØeica batteries, unlike most of those for sale on eay that vary between 1700 and 1800 mA).<br>

I was fearing tons of replies like "only original batteries on my M3"... ;-)</p>

<p>Hi<br>

Does anyone have experience with non-original 1800 mA batteries for M8 / M9?<br>

I guess the slightly lower current (1800 mA vs the 1900 mA given by the original batteries) may result in slightly fewer shots per charge.<br>

However, Leica claims that any other batteries than the original ones can make the camera malfunction or even damage it, and guarantee of course wouldn't cover this.<br>

Yet, original batteries cost 110 - 130 $, while the non-original come for 10 - 20 $ (there are many on ebay).<br>

Any experience? thanx</p>

<p>...</p><div></div>

<p>I''ll post a couple of shots I kind of like</p><div></div>

<p>A special sunrise, the first after 2 months of polar night.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks a lot guys. I'll definitely give it a try (though it won't turn out so wide on the M8 as it does on Alans M6).</p>

<p>here we go</p><div></div>