baisao

Thanks, Charlie & Skeeter.

Elegant, Charlie!

Great shots, fellas!

"FWIW, the rangefinder on my early M6 (made in Wetzlar and still with Leitz emblem rather than Leica) flared easily. And framing accuracy was never something I associated with a Leica rangefinder." My M6 is also an early one with Leitz emblem and Wetzlar engraving. It flared on me the first 30 minutes I used it but rarely flared at all after that. It has probably been a couple of years since I have experienced it flaring. Go figure. It frames prefectly for me even in close focusing with a 50mm. The magnification is 0.72, if that matters, and it has never been opened up for a CLA so it is just as it as when it left the factory.

That is a very fine photo, Barry!

Contrary to what has been said here regarding the framing accuracy of the M6, I have frequently been astonished by how accurate the framing is. I sometimes use a Mamiya 7ii and the accuracy is stated at 20%, which I find dismal in practice. I also like to frame tightly. To me it is a value to use as much of the negative as possible. The trade-off of this has been noted above but I mostly scan so I nearly always crop to the edges, rather than to 4x5. My M6 isn't as afflicted with flare and framing inaccuracy as yours seems to be, Mukul. My sample is an early M6 Classic that was made in Wetzler. I wonder if I got lucky with my sample or if Leitz in Wetzlar did a better job building cameras than Leitz in Midland (though I have frequently heard there is no difference in craftsmanship).

<p>It's been a wild month. Hopefully everyone has had opportunities to take photos. Let's see what you've shot.</p> <p><em>Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar / Ilford Pan F / Pyrocat-HD</em> </p> <div></div>

<p>Leica M6 'Wetzlar' / 50mm Summicron ver. 4 / Eastman 5222 / Pyrocat-HD</p><div></div>

I wouldn't alter the finish on any Leica equipment but the first thing that came to mind was to use camo paints that are used for guns. They are semi-durable and come in various colors. http://www.scout.com/military/snipers-hide/story/1454717-how-to-camouflage-paint-a-rifle

Knut, I am just kicking tires. Considering that most of my work is B&W and that I prefer lenses with neutral character, the v1 makes sense to me. As for cutting a notch into hoods, I see what you mean with vented vs the less complex IROOA. I'll add to this that it would feel a bit blasphemous to alter an antique so much. Perhaps blasphemy isn't the word. I know I would feel bad doing it. Hehe.

That is a fine suggestion, Edward!

It is funny you say that, Knut. I saw on eBay where someone did just that. It didn't look half bad. Why the IROOA instead of the 12585? Is it because the latter is deeper?

Thank's Knut. That's very helpful. Of course I still lurk. Take it you prefer the 12585 even though it is not supposed to be for the 35mm 'Cron?

Is there a reversible hood for the 35mm Summicron v1?

Edward, why does the v1 command a higher price? I saw a shot with one and thought it was particularly lovely but questioned its performance in the bright Texas sun. Regarding KEH: I contacted them but they had no idea which versions were in stock. They didn't even have a S/N in their system to use as a reference. The buyer must have known the version when they purchased these lenses but they failed to capture important information that would be meaningful to a customer. I assume their sales people are not getting commissions because the gentleman was far from helpful, just a real shrug of an experience.

Thanks, Charlie! I am just popping in. Capital photos from you. Just nailing it!

After you click "comfirm" (which posts your text) you will come to a window that will allow you to upload an image. I *think* the size is less than 700px and less than 120kb.

Barry, I think you sold me with that second shot! That is precisely the look that I get from my 50mm v4, only in 35mm. For all that people want sharpness and flatness, I find lens sharpness aesthetically distracting in many images. I've found optics from the 40s to be plenty sharp enough for my liking. I don't care about flatness so much since I am not using the lens for copying work. A pleasing character means more to me. This is why I prefer the 3.5 Tessar of my Rolleiflex to the lenses on my optically perfect Mamiya 7. Outstanding pics, all around! I'll join in the fun after I get this next roll developed.

I can't easily thank you individually but everyone of you have contributed valuable insight into this. Fortunately, I don't have GAS in this instance, just a knowledge that I will need a wider lens suitable to my style of shooting, preferably equivalent in look to the lenses I already have. I'm not likely to ever shoot digital so having a lens that is optimized for digital is good to know since it will have a different look compared to what I am searching for. I do like to shoot wide open and have had no problems doing so with the 50mm v4. What had/has me waffling on this is the coma on the 35mm v4. I can tolerate a lot of misbehaving in a lens but coma, ghosting, and CA bother me quite a bit. I realize that the newer formulas are sharper but I would like to assemble a kit with lenses that have an equivalent look. As Barry and others have pointed out, I should simply go with the 35mm v4 since it is the same vintage as my 50mm. Thanks for posting in w/nw, Barry. I'll scoot over there now.

<p>Thank you, Giovanni Cappai, for stepping in for me last month and getting this started.</p> <p>I can't imagine how the weather has been around the world but it has been very wet here, which is great news since we've been in a drought for 6 years now.</p> <p>There are a lot of creeks that flow into Bull Creek, that ultimately flow into the Colorado River. This waterfall has a tiny step at the top before flowing over a dome of limestone into a pool below.</p> <p>Anyway, this is my second attempt with a pinhole. It's fuzzy but has a certain charm to me.</p> <p><em>RealitySoSimple 6x17 / Velvia 100 / f233 @ 9 seconds</em></p> <p> </p><div></div>

I use a 50mm Summicron v4 for my film work and have been very pleased with it. My favorite focal length, however, is 35mm. I am looking for a 35mm lens that has complimentary look to the 50mm Summicron v4. The obvious choice would be the 35mm Summicron v4 since it is also a Mandler design from the same generation of Leitz lenses. There may be other candidates, however. The Zeiss 35mm ZM is apparently sharper and renders OOF better that the 35mm v4 'Cron but I have no way of knowing if its character, a sum of the parts, more closely matches the 50mm v4 'Cron. What I like about the 50mm v4 'Cron: somewhat neutral look, very low distortion, flat enough corner to corner for me wide open, no coma, pleasingly sharp without being distractingly sharp. I tend to shoot between f2 and f11 mostly. Thanks!

<p>Thanks for catching my slack, Giovanni. I have been in the middle of what seems like an endless move. Before I knew it it was the end of April.</p> <p>Lovely work everyone!</p>

<p>My apologies for being late on this. We are in the middle of a move.</p> <p>It's wildflower season here and the trees are flowering. It's a good time to be outside, especially at night. Let's see your images.</p> <p><em>Mamiya RZ67 Pro II / 180mm / Acros 100 / DD-X / No meter</em><br> Please click <strong><a href=" to view larger on Flickr.</p> <div></div>

"Jim, I don't see there being much difference. The tubes are effectively a drum in every aspect except potential to spin the tubes really fast." This is a pre-test that Fred has asked me to do. Sandy, in another forum, suggested a spread of times 5-8-12-16-20 minutes, with a 5 min presoak. Sandy described the 5 min. test neg as going to "give a negative with very low contrast and somewhat less than full film speed". This describes what I saw at 4 minutes: no density past step 11. I don't know what Fred is looking for other than density. Even after describing my last 4 minute test via email before mailing it back, he said he still needed to test the density to know if the dilution is correct. I suspect he is trying to get a rapid development time and this developer, being kind of slow, is not behaving as he would expect from D76 or DD-X. I'll communicate Sandy's suggestions to Fred and move from there.

"Does Fred use this to see some level of initial emergence of an image as part of a routine before the actual EI testing?" Precisely so, Craig.