aric_rothman

<p>I have the LT version of this mount, and I am very happy with it. The screws with retain the mount are not Phillips head screws, but JIS (Japanese Industrial Standard) screws. Phillips head screwdrivers will tend to cam out, and with the sensor exposed, that could be disastrous. A set of JIS screwdrivers can be readily obtained from Amazon.</p>

<p>shoot different</p>

The build quality of the Kobalux 21/2.8 is very high. The focus ring action is light and smooth, with no blacklash or play. The aperture ring dentents are well-defined. The knurls on both are well-done.

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1769086-md.jpg"></center>

The Kobalux 21/2.8 is a doubleplus-good lens. I thought about selling mine once, but then I came down with a case of sanity.

 

Sadly, their manufacture is discontinued.

Well, I hocked my Hektor for smokes and liquor,

 

Now the only bokeh is the mist in my eyes,

 

And no matter how much I blur in Photoshop

 

The retouching is all just shameful lies.

Sorry for the repeat, but my carriage returns got eaten for some reason...

 

 

Those lousy bucks I got for my Noctilux

 

Are long gone and spent

 

And even its f-one-point-oh

 

Couldn't photograph the darkness in my soul

 

Since my hammertone paid the rent.

Those lousy bucks I got for my Noctilux

Are long gone and spent

And even it's f-one-point-oh

Couldn't photograph the darkness in my soul

Since my hammertone paid the rent.

I have one of these (3rd gen) in black. It is an absolutely superb lens, and a great pleasure to use. The focus ring is scalloped nicely, and rotates smoothly, without binding. The images it produces are sharp and contrasty.

 

I've found this lens, especially in tandem with the sizeable viewfinder it is paired with, tends to get people's attention. I guess it appears out of proportion to the small bodies it gets mounted on.

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2067634-lg.jpg"><p><i>Latte Ennui</i></center>

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1401681-lg.jpg"></center>

sans Leica

<i>Not if it's a Leica lens.</i><p><p>

 

I can see it now: The Leica Negalux. Price? One kidney. Add a liver section for anthracite or hammertone.

Not to fear. Irwin Puts will probably find a small amount of decentering; maybe some backfocus issues, too.

1) "To get on with it." -<i>John Richard Massey</i><p> Here here.<p>

2) Getting some of my work displayed publicly. A coffee shop in my neighborhood wants to show some of my pics. The prospect really has me wired, and it's not just the coffee. :)<p>

3) Lose (a substantial amount of) weight. What's the point in carrying some of the lightest and most compact photographic gear ever made, while simultaneously toting a spare tire; in my case, a spare tractor tire.<p>

4) Stop obsessing about equipment...<p>

4a) ...right after getting...

<p><p>

<i>(sigh)</i>

This is not a new image, nor is it made with a Leica, but it is of a dear and recently departed friend...<p><p>

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2093447-lg.jpg" width=400></center><p><p>

I'll miss you, Jake.

Since you'll now have a grip, and it appears to have a hot shoe by your description, a hot shoe-mount flash would be called for. A Vivitar 283 or 285HV are the prototypical choices. I'd get (in fact, I have) a Vivitar 283, and a <a href="http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=1000001064">Sto-Fen</a> diffuser fitted for it. The diffuser works wonders to soften the flash's otherwise harsh light.

Happy Chanukah everyone! Enjoy eight nights of ever increasing

available light!

The most convincing argument I've seen for the Hexar RF's purported point-of-focus problem is loose tolerances for manufacture of the bodies. My findings with regards to lens flange to film plane distance is including the the previously mentioned article by Dante Stella. My Hexar RF's and M6's film to flange distances are within 0.01mm of each other, so I'm apparently fortunate to have a Hexar RF built to Leica spec in that dimension. I use M-Hexanon lenses on my RF, M6, and M3, and don't perceive any focusing problems. I also use Leica and CV lenses on my RF, again with no apparent focusing error.

 

How do your M-Hexanon lenses perform on Leica bodies? Are their true points of focus equal to what is indicated in the rangefinder and on their focusing scales? If so, it is certainly a quandry, as the flange depth for which the M-Hexanon lenses are designed can't spontaniously change when mounted on a Leica or CV body.

 

Also, it seems to me that if flange distance is the root cause of the problem you are observing, the focusing depth error would change, depending on lens focal length. The wider angle the lens, the more critical is the accuracy of the flange distance, and the greater effect error in same will have on shifting point of focus.

<center><img src="http://home.woh.rr.com/anl/images/dry blossoms-small-border.jpg"></center>

But soyresouly folks...

 

That was no legume, that was my rice.

 

Thank you folks. I'm here till Sunday. Try the tofu.

.,.<div></div>

Wrong image. <i>Fara San Martino</i> is the Escher work I had in mind.

Thanks for the well-executed images of a lovely place, Fredrick. I am reminded of the lithograph <i>Castrovalva</i> by M.C.Escher; by the second image especially.

Steve Gandy is advertising the 25mm packaged with a new model of bright line finder. I recently took a peek through a friend's VC 28mm bright line finder. If the new 25 is like my friend's 28, it will not disappoint, IMHO.