Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/11

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma
From: don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory)
Date: Mon Sep 11 18:09:32 2006
References: <9b678e0609110446o524fa927l2d6fda30df38e46@mail.gmail.com> <001c01c6d605$5db129b0$6501a8c0@asus930>

Hoppy,
I guess that I have too much English blood in me.  Sometimes, good enough at
1.4 is better than waiting for F4 and 1/250.  If I see something that
elicits interest, then I will attempt an image.  Many times crap, but
sometimes delight.  And that is the real draw of digital, you have a 600
exposure roll of film that is both color and B&W and it works at 100 to
3200.  Plus, you don't have to wait to see whether the idea worked or
didn't.

Please bear in mind that I am still almost exclusively film based.  But the
electrons are calling to me and the silver chlorides and bromides are
playing coy.  I have to call NY to get them, I have to call elsewhere to get
the proper stimulants to get them to respond.  And the electrons call to
me...

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 9/11/06, G Hopkinson <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> Don, I do understand what you are saying regarding low noise at 400 ISO.
> Still, where the light allows the lower the better, I think. Just as I'd
> rather use Velvia/Astia or Delta 100/Neopan Acros than 400
> ISO or higher films, I mean.
> You are saying that there is no equivalent of a 1.4 35 asph for you or the
> f2 28 for B.D.
> OK. Keep on using film just as long as we can get it.
> I had a 1.2 Nikkor amongst my (Nikon manual focus) fifties once. Danged if
> I could use that narrow DOF effectively. I liked the 1.4s
> but just mainly for the bright finder on those cameras.
>
> Of course, if you guys are perpetually working wide open at 1600 ISO we're
> pointing our cameras at different stuff. I think I have
> to place my amateur self in the Germanic, highest possible quality, 250th
> or better, down a stop or so, really should have brought
> the tripod camp.
>
> Without wishing to give anyone indigestion, I think that the four thirds
> stuff is like Linux vs Windows! :-) I mean technically very
> interesting and clever but not the mainstream.
> I think Leica's and Panasonic's entries there are just keeping their
> options open.
>
> Cheers
> Hoppy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:
> lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Don Dory
> Sent: Monday, 11 September 2006 21:46
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma
>
> Hoppy,
> With almost everybody an effective 400 ISO is no different in output than
> settings closer to 100.  On the Canon sensors, even 1600 ISO doesn't seem
> to
> affect anything but the darkest shadows.
>
> The crop factor means that there is no fast 35mm equivalent which is an
> important focal length for many people.  Also, for shooters like B.D. who
> habitually use a 28mm as their body cap they go from F2 to 2.8 and if they
> were already at 1600 there doesn't leave much room to shoot as they have
> before.
>
> I see this as interesting as up to now, we have been given better and
> better
> tools.  Films go faster and better, lenses got faster and then faster and
> better.  It is hard to believe that the 21 Biogon was the widest lens you
> could get in 1954 with the exception of some Hypergons for large
> format.  As
> the MBA's keep the R&D focused on what will sell in sufficient quantities
> (12-24 at F4) instead of 10-40 2.8-3.5) we don't see the extremes like we
> used to.  In the middle fifities you could buy an F1.1 lens for your NIkon
> from Nikon or Zunow.  Zeiss brought out the superlative 21 Biogon.  We had
> 75 F1.5's that were really good and 85 F1.5's that had charachter.  Yes
> Canon is coming out with a 50mm F1.2 but they were doing that three
> decades
> ago.
>
> Olympus I think has missed the boat with their 4/3 system for many of us.
> If they had produced a 25mm F1.4 or a 50mm F1.4 then I think the Leica
> style
> shooters would have migrated in large numbers.  Instead they made some
> really good long glass that was fast, but the sports shooters needed more
> frames per second and the wildlife people wanted/needed more than 5MP so
> Olympus languishes at under 3% market share in Japan and elsewhere.
>
> Don
> don.dory@gmail.com
>
>
> On 9/10/06, G Hopkinson <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > Don,
> > I don't think shooting at 800 to 1600 ought to be the routine thing,
> more
> > like emergency back up, accepting the lesser quality
> > because that's all the light there is.
> > I'd be wanting to operate at ISO 100 to 200 for lowest possible noise
> and
> > maintain the apertures as what I'd use for 35mm, One stop
> > or so below maximum. That's what we pay the big bucks for with Leica
> > glass. Of course large DOF is not always desirable either.
> > Or is my film mindset not valid in the newest sensors world?
> > I think it would be market suicide to make glass in M mount with an
> image
> > circle too small for 35mm.
> > No way Solms could afford to alienate their existing customer base in
> the
> > niche. They are never going to compete directly with the
> > huge Japanese camera and electrical goods companies.
> >
> > However, with their commitment to four thirds they still have an avenue
> > for dedicated glass for digital. Lots of Olympus and
> > Panasonic etc folks would be happy to consider Solms designs for their
> > four thirds cameras, in my opinion. Plus of course the
> > compact digitals shared with Panasonic.
> >
> > Regarding the expected crop factor which seems pretty certain, I thought
> > that the f2 28 asph (and the new 2.8?) fitted neatly into
> > the 35 slot, with the 21 or 24 working for around the 28 and the f2  or
> > f1.4 35 becoming the new 50. I'd be pretty happy with the
> > current 50's as lovely portrait lenses, I'm sure. I imagine those folks
> > with the Noctilux would be downright cheerful, using them
> > for available light portraits
> >
> > Cheers
> > Hoppy,
> > 2 Aussie cents worth.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:
> > lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> > Don Dory
> > Sent: Monday, 11 September 2006 11:02
> > To: Leica Users Group
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma
> >
> > Leica faces an interestin conundrum.  If they bite the bullet and make
> > lenses for cropped sensors they will relcaim the small camera/high
> > performance position they held in the thirties and beyond.  However,
> > thousands of Leicanistas will shriek in rage at being betrayed.  So, in
> > all
> > probablity no F1.4 26mm lens or for that matter no 21mm f2 lens.
> >
> > On the bright side, the ability to shoot at 800 to 1600 ameliorates the
> > need
> > for fast lenses as far as capturing the image but we still have issues
> > with
> > limiting DOF intentionally.  On the down side, I am going to have to
> bite
> > the bullet and acquire a 35 F1.4 as the 50mm perspective is the one I
> use
> > most.  Possibly the C/V 40mm F1.4 with the crop the edges won't matter.
> >
> > Don
> > don.dory@gmail.com
> >
> >
> > On 9/10/06, Aram Langhans <dnaplasmid@compwrx.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > 35!    32!  37!   What's a few millimeters among friends???
> > > Aram
> > >
> > > > Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:04:45 -0400
> > > > From: Stan Yoder <vze2myh5@verizon.net>
> > > > Subject: [Leica] M8 lens dilemma
> > > > To: lug@leica-users.org
> > > > Message-ID: <45047DED.7050007@verizon.net>
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> > > >
> > > > So what are yunz (Pittsburghese for 'you-all') planning to do for
> the
> > > > equivalent of a 35 on a film M?
> > > >
> > > > The 24 Elmarit-ASPH becomes a 32, and a 28 becomes a 37.
> > > >
> > > > Stan Yoder
> > > > The Burgh
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)
In reply to: Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)