Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/03/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 35/3.5 Summaron LTM
From: jsmith342 at cox.net (Jeffery Smith)
Date: Sun Mar 12 07:07:43 2006

The consensus from the people who have it and those who have reviewed it is
that the 35/3.5 is good as long as it is stopped down considerably. I'm not
crazy about that restraint, so I'll go after big brother 2.8.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA
http://www.400tx.com




-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Slobodan
Dimitrov
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 8:53 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] 35/3.5 Summaron LTM


Now the f2.8 Summaron is another animal. While not as small as it  
F3.5 counterpart, it certainly dovetails quite well, with its  
signature, alongside the current lenses.

Slobodan Dimitrov
Studio G-8,
Angels Gate Cultural Center
http://sdimitrovphoto.com





On Mar 12, 2006, at 6:40 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote:

> Well, that's the kind of character I'm looking for. When lenses were 
> designed for B&W film, I guess there wasn't much tweaking for
> color. With
> color as the way to go later in the century, saturation was the way  
> to go.
> And with that came contrast (which I can do without). Although I'm  
> not a
> praticer of the Zone System, I would like to see all of those zones
> represented in an image.
>
> Right now, I'm pursuing the 35/2.8, which is more of a challenge
> than the
> 35/3.5.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> http://www.400tx.com
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Peter
> Dzwig
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 3:24 AM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] 35/3.5 Summaron LTM
>
>
> Very happy with it. Good performance for its time, still a very  
> good lens,
> although obviously very different from present lenses in character.
>
> see:
>
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/album164/pathSt_Marthas200512
>
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/album347/Blowingoutcandles
>
> Peter Dzwig
>
> Jeffery Smith wrote:
>
>> What is the consensus on this as a shooter?
>>
>> Jeffery Smith
>> New Orleans, LA
>> http://www.400tx.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from langeratcarleton at gmail.com (Mark Langer) ([Leica] 35/3.5 Summaron LTM)
In reply to: Message from s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] 35/3.5 Summaron LTM)