Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I preface what follows by pointing out that I have never owned or used a Summilux 50 1.4. I have, however, owned and used the Nikon 50 1.4 AIS and the Canon manual focus 50 1.4. - as well as the 50 Summicron... ...Got back my first film shot using the Nokton 50 1.5...Tri-X rated at 800. I realize that this is hardly the ideal film for lens testing, but as this is what I normally use, it's what I used. I didn't take any "test" shots, just used the lens. And I am VERY happy with the results. Under some very contrasty, low light conditions, as well as fairly even indoor and outdoor lighting, this inexpensive marvel produces sharp, contrasty, apparently defect free images. Using the old eye-ball/eyelash sharpness test (which I know is not a real lens test) this thing is as sharp as any 50 I've used, even opened wide... I have not yet used it under any conditions I would expect to cause serious flare problems, but based on preliminary real-world results, I'd say this lens is one hell of a bargin for $459, and, frankly, for a 50 1.5 for an M or LTM, would still be a good deal at at least twice the price. B. D. P.S. - at some point I'll post a few images - and yes, I certainly understand that you can't judge a lens that's better than a coke bottle - or the old Nikkor 43-86 zoom - by internet images..:-) - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of csocolow Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2000 4:31 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] leica/holga fix? Uh, Guy, With all due respect to your tongue-in-cheek humor, I should note that I have electrical tape all over my Holga to minimize the light leaks on the film. But it doesn't have any of the rangefinder patch flare problems that my M6 exhibits. On the other hand I end up prefocusing both of them most of the time: The Holga because I have to; The Leica because I can't see to coincide the rangefinder images in awkward lighting situations. I love using my Holga alongside my Leicas because its images are the complete antithesis to those of the Leica. Plus it's so easy to do double, triple or quadruple exposures with the Holga. Now if I could only fit a Polaroid back on it to run Type 665 I'd be a happy camper. Carl Socolow http://members.tripod.com/SocPhoto/ New email address: csocolow@mindspring.com Guy Bennett wrote: > > >At 01:59 PM 11/02/2000 -0000, you wrote: > >>>My god people, you buy a $2,000 M6 camera body and then > >>>believe it's OK to use > >>>tape or a rubber band to get it to work right ?? > >>> > > > >Exactly. If I wanted a camera to retrofit with rubber bands I would have > >bought a Holga. > > dear begruntled lugger: > > the holga does not require rubber bands: it does not exhibit any of the > problems currently bemoaned by luggers against easy fixes for simple > problems. the same is true of the diana and the lomo. > > furthermore, all three of these plastic wonders cost a fraction of a > fraction of even a used leica m, whatever the number. > > should the rangefinder flare problem that so aggregiously mars the contre > jour performance of the m6 prove too unsettling, send your defective m to > me, and i will graciously provide you with a diana or holga loaner until > you get the nikon or canon replacement of your choice, as we know that > these cameras do not require homespun remedies to take an honest picture. > > most sincerely, > > guy - --