richard_hoag

Thanks John, probably cheaper to keep the Alpas going!

Is it possible to have an an angenieux retrofocus lens, 90mm, 35mm and 28mm,

modified so it mounts w/ coupled focusing on an M body? I have shot with these

lenses on an Alpa body and enjoy the look, I would love to be able to have a

coupled mount configured for their use on an M7.

Well thought out general outline with consideration to the reality of current niche manufacturing, R&D, distribution and marketing. Complete a more detailed business plan and get it to Zeiss and Leica, you never know.

DAG. Easy to work with, phone responsive, quality work and reasonable pricing. The R6 is a great camera, small, manual with a Leica mount.

Those are intersting specs from the LUG meeting. It is unfortunate that Leica cannot seem to understand that a M size body (made from composits) containing a "100%" chip with an optical viewfinder at a price competitive with the Canon 5D would be a home run for those of us who prefer the rangefinder. Given the pace of digital technology, I am not excited about having to purchase additional Leica glass in order to get "equivalent" focal lengths from an expensive body built for the ages.

 

I have been playing with a Panasonic LC-1 purchased recently, shooting color along side my M3 or M7 loaded with XP2. It is a bit large but respecting the paticulars of digital reproduction (white bal., ISO, JPG vs. RAW)it produces remarkably accurate color and very fine detail up to 8x10.

 

I have used Leica equiptment for 34 years and have great respect for their products. I hope they proceed by taking advantage of their historical (optics & function) strenghts while accepting the flexability and of current technology and adapt to it instead of fighting it.

If the Rokker is the same as the 40mm Summicron call LeicaUSA, parts dept., they stock the caps and rubber hood and the pricing is (was?) reasonable.

I was in a like situation very recently and purchased the Panasonic DMZ-FZ3, the results have been impressive. Leica glass, f/2.8 throughout the HUGE zoom range, 3.1 megapixal, all the goodies and small enough to fit in a handbag. She has her 'Leica' and I have mine. You owe it to yourself to take a good look at this camera if for no other reason than the lens, it has been impressive ritght out of the box.

Ahhh, envy. I purchased a USA 'Test' M7 for the same price as a standard M7 because I appreciate what the flag represents, the oppurtunity presented itself and I took it. I get three kinds of responses: (i)very cool, (ii) how did you get that, (iii) screw America; it never fails to kick start the conversation. The camera is used, not in a collection and I plan to give it a long and active life.

I have used an M6 (b&w)and M7 (color) many times to shoot fly-fishing trips from drift boats and pontoon boats, the dry-bags (I use the clear ones)are the way to go. I've had them floating down the river beside me, cameras inside, no damage. Keep the dry bag full of air (you'll understand when you see them)with some light padding (T-shirts work fine)and some common sense and you will be fine

Bob: I have owned both versions and find the DOF scale on the 2nd version to be invaluable. As a travel/walk-about/hiking/event w flash/snapshot lens the Tri cannot be beat. The f4 can be limiting but modern film can help in this regard. My compact kit consists of an M7 (or M6) the Tri and a 90/f2.8; from the mountains to the city to the countryside to the beach, in pockets or backpacks or motorcycle saddlebags I have never had a mechanical problem with either version. If you seek convienence, image quality and versatility there is nothing like the Tri in the Leica M line.

I am seeking feedback from those with experience using Angenieux

zooms on Leicaflex and R bodies. Thank you for your replies.

I'm with Jamie as to his comments above. Leica needs to partner with Canon and produce an M body modified to accept advanced Canon digital technology. This thread has come up before; for you tech forum members out there, what are the technical reasons that this is not possible?

B&H has different prices for imported and USA film representing many

brands. Does anyone have experience with or know how they differ?

I have owned both the original and current version. The mechanics of the first version are not as crisp as the current lens but optically they are both great performers. I purchased the second version primarily for the depth of field scale and it is and has been my most used lens since it was introduced. The only drawback is the f/4 max, I would love F/2.8; other than that the lens equals the respective primes everything being equal.

Below is Marke Gilbert's question regarding color negative film. What

is the opinion of Forum members regarding B&W films, both C-41

process and traditional emulsion for medium contrast, fine grain

general use. Thank you for your opinions.

In a practical and realistic sense the Magnifier does just what it is intended to do, increases the focusing accuracy of lenses 50mm and up. It does not protrude from the back of the camera enough to be noticeable, the very slight reduction of viewfinder light level is more than off-set by the magnification and yes, it does have a hard time balancing beach balls on its nose. I have used it with 50, 75, 90 and 135mm lenses as well as the 3E (35mm and up)on both the M6 and M7 .72 and believe it is a great addition to the M accessory group.

Try the 135 Tele-Elmarit/f4 with the rubber hood originally made for

the C90/f4. Makes for a very compact package (you can put it in your

pocket) and has already been noted the lens is a wonderful performer.

Have fun, you might try the 1.25x magnifier with the 135mm if your

eyes are getting older as are mine.

Try the 135 Tele-Elmarit/f4 with the rubber hood originally made for

the C90/f4. Makes for a very compact package (you can put it in your

pocket) and has already been noted the lens is a wonderful performer.

Have fun, you might try the 1.25x magnifier with the 135mm if your

eyes are getting older as are mine, I've been thinking about

purchasing one but have not made the move yet.

I have used T400cn at +1 and +2, very good resolution, fine grain and

medium contrast. Give it a try in a test before you shoot valued

shots, I think you will like the results.

I was unaware that my pricing was so out of line. The lens has been

returned to the shop where it was purchased.

I had misplaced my 15mm and believed it had been lifted from my bag. I ordered a new one and before it was delivered found the misplaced one. I am selling the new one with the adapter and the fitted case, the lens has never been mounted on a camera, all delivered in original packaging.

 

<p>

 

Total package $470.00, I will pay shipping.

 

<p>

 

If you do not own or have not used this lens I can only say you need one. The field of view is fantastic, the glass sharp and contrasty, the build quality first rate (if Leica had made it I would hate to think of the cost) and the physical size is smaller than the 35mm Summicron. I will accept PAYPAL or money order. Thought I would give the forum a chance before I go to other selling venue. Email me if interested. Thank you.

Roger, does your post insinuate that if you are a very nice person

you can purchase a new M7 for $2,849 less 15% less 19.6% VAT for a

total of $1,947.00? I am heading that way, if your figures are

correct an M7 would be very tempting.

I have to agree with Jay. I have used the 3E since it was introduced

and have found it to be a wonderful alternative to the respective

primes. The lens is in its element when you are traveling light,

don't want your pockets full of lenses or a bag on your sholder

and/or are shooting an outdoor event where space is limited. You can

act fast, frame fast, shoot in available light and be assurred of

supurb contrast, sharpness and resolution; this is why you use an M.

I am planning on overseas travel with the M kit. Several bodies, lenses and accessories. What is the proceedure for registering with US Customs, is it necessary, do the experienced on this forum suggest it? Thank you.

Many users of this forum tend toward excellence. Regarding digital printing, does anyone have practical working experience with dye sublimation printers, specificly the Olympus P-400. Is the quality better than the high end inkjet printers? Thank you.