kyoken74

<p>I was looking for a 50mm lens about a year ago for my M9. For me, I wanted the versatility of focusing at normal distance as well as close distance.<br> <br /> I had eliminated DR Summicron for my search, because I learned that it won't focus to infinity on digital M's.<br /> Collapsible Summicron focuses to infinity on my M9 just fine, and I can also close focus with SOMKY. I came across a collapsible Summicron LTM in good condition at a fairly good price, hence I ended up with that lens.<br> <br /> I do not own any other 50mm's to compare characteristics/performance, but rigid Summicron (in paricular, DR), seems to be better reputed for its performance. I did consider rigid Summicron plus SOMKY+UOORF, but at the time, I could not find any rigid Summicron in my price range.</p>

Congrats on your new M3 and Summicron. The photos look great to me. I'm not experienced enough to tell shutter speed issues, but I trust the people in this forum if they noticed one. Besides, if you get it CLA'ed up front, you don't have to wonder whether there is a problem with the camera/lens if you get some odd results. BTW, I love my copy of the collapsible Summicron. I am a wide angle junkie, and I never thought I'd say this, but I particularly like the landscape taken with my Summicron wide open focused at infinity. (If I wanted more DoF, I use my wide angle lenses stopped down at hyper focal). The visible light and IR won't focus on the same plane with this lens. In IR rich environment (typically indoors), it is conceivable that the out-of-focus IR can reduce the overall sharpness of the image, if your film is sensitive to IR. IR cut filter would correct this. For this reason, I use IR cut filter with my M8 when I shoot indoors even though I always shoot in B&W. There is so little IR outdoors relative to visible light that I doubt it makes any difference.

I see value in sticking with one camera/lens combination. I would go with M3 and Summicron. Some shoot for the end product. Some for the experience of getting there. I imagine you'll find it a liberating experience.

<p><a title="Lackawanna, Hoboken NJ Transit Terminal, 14-Nov-2012 (L1006422)" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/8187308902/in/dateposted-public/" data-flickr-embed="true" data-header="true" data-footer="true"><img src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8484/8187308902_0bdaf16e2e_z.jpg" alt="Lackawanna, Hoboken NJ Transit Terminal, 14-Nov-2012 (L1006422)" width="640" height="430" /></a><br> From my earlier attempts at photography...<br> <strong>Lackawanna, Hoboken NJ Transit Terminal, 14-Nov-2012</strong><br> Leica M8, Summicron 28/2</p>

<p><a title="Pier A Park, Hoboken, NJ, 15-Nov-2014 (L1016057) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/15178570303"><img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5615/15178570303_21d17b5c46_z.jpg" alt="Pier A Park, Hoboken, NJ, 15-Nov-2014 (L1016057)" width="640" height="426" /></a><br> <strong>Pier A Park, Hoboken, NJ, 15-Nov-2014</strong><br> Summicron 50/2 Collapsible LTM + M9<br> </p>

<p>Richard, Thanks for your comment. Photography is like a never ending quest for me, you know. So, I just go, what a heck, let me try this or that... The picture of the teapot was one of those this week. I had no clue where to focus or how to compose something like this, so, I shot a ton to see which one I liked better. At least, it is cheaper when I waste megapixels instead of film...</p>

<p>Double Post</p>

<p><a title="Teapot, 13-Nov-2014 (L1015912) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/15783750192"><img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7570/15783750192_5e54108e09_z.jpg" alt="Teapot, 13-Nov-2014 (L1015912)" width="640" height="426" /></a><br> <strong>Teapot</strong><br> Leica M9 + Summicron 50/2 LTM Collapsible + SOMKY</p>

<p>@Afzal,<br /> <br /> As others have already pointed out, the questions are a little bit vague, but I'll do my best at answering them. <br /> <br /> <strong>Which one gives the best results?</strong><br /> I have a C Biogon 21/4.5 and Summicron 28/2, but no 24mm lenses. I find the 21mm to be more challenging than 28mm but also more rewarding. I use external viewfinder with both 21mm and 28mm with M9, because I cannot see the built-in 28mm frameline. I wear eyeglasses. On the other hand, with Leica MP with .58x viewfinder, I do use the built-in 28mm frameline.<br /> Looking through the <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/sets/72157620960245622/">12 most popular photos in my photostream at flickr</a>, as of today,</p> <ul> <li>8 were shot with 21mm (out of total 30 images shot with 21mm)</li> <li>3 were shot with 28mm (out of total 50 images shot with 28mm)</li> <li>1 was shot with 35mm (out of total 9 images shot with 35mm)</li> </ul> <p>The popularity is not an indication of quality, of course, and someone else might have the same set of lenses and have completely different results. I thought I share mine. For reference, I also posted the number of images shot with each focal length in my photostream. As you can see, 28mm is my favorite. I use that most.<br /> <br /> By "results" if you are referring to the resolution, distortion, etc, I'm sure you can find the MTF charts on the Internet for these lenses.</p> <p><strong>Which is the most expensive?</strong><br /> I suggest that you look them up eBay and other used camera shops to determine the prices.</p> <p><strong>Which one is most desireable?</strong><br /> By "desirable," perhaps you are asking about whether these lenses are collectibles. I must defer to the collectors among us to answer that question. I suspect that none of the three listed is a collectible. I vaguely remember 21/3.4 Super-Elmar was recalled shortly after its initial release due to some focus problems. Because there are very few of that example, that might be a collectible... but I do not know for sure.</p>

Mukul, while I agree with your point, I also wonder if there is a different expectations some of the novices today have, which did not exist back then. It is easier to get disappointed when the first attempt at film photography yields results worse than a camera phone, where as back in the sixties, that very same first attempt may come across as a magical experience.

I love going through everyone's photos. Thanks.

<p><a title="Videographer, Photographer, and Grocery Shopper on Coney Island, 21-Jun-2008 (N1000516) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/2738610700"><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2386/2738610700_867eaf9b53_z.jpg" alt="Videographer, Photographer, and Grocery Shopper, Mermaid Parade, 21-Jun-2008 (N1000516)" width="640" height="414" /></a></p> <p><strong>Videographer, Photographer, and Grocery Shopper on Coney Island, 21-Jun-2008</strong><br> Voigtlander Ultron 28/1.9 + Bessa R4M</p> <p>I have not been able to go outside much lately, and did not had a chance to take pictures. Here's another one of my earlier attempts at photography...</p>

This happened to me with my MP (2003). Never with IIIf or M2.

<p><a title="Pride Parade, 28-Jun-2009 (N1047246) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/3699945892"><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2552/3699945892_05bf0aece6_z.jpg" alt="Pride Parade, 28-Jun-2009 (N1047246)" width="640" height="415" /></a></p> <p><strong>Pride Parade, NYC, 28-Jun-2009</strong><br> C Biogon 21/4.5 + Leica MP</p> <p>Apologies for not having anything new to share again this week. Another image from my earlier attempts at photography.</p>

<p>Hi Allan, I tried using JPEG from time to time, but I was never a big fan of it. The JPEG processing appears to take away a lot of hidden details, so, unless you nail the shot at the time of the exposure, the post processing is a pain.</p> <p>Given that 10MP compressed DNG file is small by today's standards, and a 8GB SDHC card holds 700+ of these files (that's about 20 rolls!), other than the slow write speed and the small buffer of M8, I did not find a lot of compelling reasons to use JPEG.</p> <p>The 16-bit DNG from RAW Brian mentioned earlier is worth trying. It is amazing how much detail in the shadows the Leica engineers were willing to throw away, on the grounds that they did not make perceivable difference. I agree that they make no difference when we are exposing at the sensor's rated speed, but they make a huge difference when we intend to push in post-processing. I wish if Leica released a firmware update to allow M8 to shoot uncompressed DNG, so that we do not have to do the button dance to get M8's true imaging capability.</p>

<p>Great work from everyone. I wish if I had something from this week, but it has been a crazy week and I do not have anything worth posting. I would like to share one of my earlier attempts at photography from 2009.</p> <p><a title="Milan, 10-May-2009 (N1046976) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/3758522109"><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2611/3758522109_e56cb6dee6_z.jpg?zz=1" alt="Milan, 10-May-2009 (N1046976)" width="640" height="427" /></a><br> <strong>Milan, 10-May-2009</strong><br> Leica MP + Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4</p>

Congratulations on your new M8. If you are coming from film, then the idea that you don't have ISO dial for the light meter might seem a little odd. The ISO setting in camera's menu controls the sensor's sensitivity and the light meter simultaneously. This means that, if you set the ISO to 160, you have the sensor rated at 160, and the light meter reading at 160. This is unlike film Leica because we used to have the ability to choose which sensitivity we wanted for the film, and choose the light meter setting independently from that using the ISO dial. The idea that the ISO setting in the menu controls *both* took me a while to get used to. If you are like me and have the habit of erring on the side of overexposure, I suggest that you set the exposure compensation to -1 1/3 and shoot DNG. Exposure comp setting only affects the light meter, and not the sensor sensitivity. This way, when you are shooting, you can treat your light meter reading the way you used to with your film camera, and still not blow out the highlights. I find noisy shadows preferable to overblown highlights. At sensor ISO of 160 and exposure bias -1 1/3, your light meter reads at ISO 400. At sensor ISO 640, the light meter reads at 1600. These happened to be ISOs that were more comfortable to me, when coming from film to M8. Using exposure comp may introduce some post processing needs, i.e. I'd often push the DNG +1 stop on my computer, but I found that I get better results this way. I hardly ever shoot above 640 for color, but the 16 bit RAW mentioned above might make it work if you are willing to deal with a little more post processing. Also, I am happy to see that you are embracing the IR sensitivity rather than trashing it. To me, IR was low enough that I did not bother with IR cut filter with slow daylighht lenses. Only the fast indoor lenses need them. Enjoy your new camera, and I look forward to seeing images taken by the camera in this forum.

<p><a title="Tugboat, Jersey City, NJ, Sep 2014 (L1015249) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/15159497158"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3898/15159497158_a53f1c05d4_z.jpg" alt="Tugboat, Jersey City, NJ, Sep 2014 (L1015249)" width="640" height="426" /></a><br> <strong>Tugboat, Jersey City, NJ</strong><br> Leica M9 + Zeiss C Biogon 21/4.5</p> <p> </p>

<p><a title="View of Manhattan from Frank Sinatra Drive, Hoboken, NJ, Sep 2014 (L1014495) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/15055491779"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3845/15055491779_c1bfe8e3b3_z.jpg" alt="View of Manhattan from Frank Sinatra Drive, Hoboken, NJ, Sep 2014 (L1014495)" width="640" height="426" /></a><br> Leica M9 + Zeiss C Biogon 21/4.5<br> <strong>View of Manhattan from Frank Sinatra Drive</strong></p>

<blockquote> <p>Carl, functionality falls in a <em>much</em> lower price bracket.</p> </blockquote> <p>Mukul, that is priceless...</p>

<p>I am tired of the more of the same. In the evolution of photography equipment, I feel like there were much more diversity in the past than there is today, though cameras are probably more ubiquitous today than ever before. In a world of digital cameras with LCDs, one without LCD does add some diversity. Now, someone should release a digital camera without light meter. :-)</p>

<p>They also released Leica-M Edition 60, which is a Leica M 240 without LCD.<br /> http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-Edition-60<br /> I've been waiting for digital M with a physical ISO dial for a long time, but I am not in the market for special edition cameras. I wish if they took away the LCD from their M-E product line and make it a bit smaller and cheaper.</p>

<p><a title="69th Street Transfer Bridge, 2007 (N1000907) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/2733682947"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3083/2733682947_22218999af_z.jpg" alt="69th Street Transfer Bridge, 2007 (N1000907)" width="640" height="414" /></a><br /> <strong>New York Central Railroad 69th Street Transfer Bridge</strong><br /> <strong>New York, 2007</strong><br> <strong>Bessa R4M + Ultron 28/1.9</strong></p>

<p><a title="7-Sep-2014 (L1013983) by Yuki Asayama, on Flickr" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/15017414157"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3884/15017414157_2181223476_z.jpg" alt="7-Sep-2014 (L1013983)" width="640" height="426" /></a><br> <strong>Leica M9 + Summicron 28/2</strong><br> I accidentally underexposed this shot by about 5 stops.<br> Great shots, everyone. I particularly like the second one Eddie posted.</p>

<p>@E. Short, Thanks.</p>