Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/11

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

Subject: [Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question
From: luisripoll at telefonica.net (Lluis Ripoll)
Date: Thu Dec 11 14:00:59 2008
References: <C565BE71.46455%mark@rabinergroup.com> <2CF021FC-8565-49F8-949A-0478A3B5E0AB@verizon.net>

Me too, Len

Saludos cordiales
lluis


El 11/12/2008, a las 1:14, Leonard Taupier escribi?:

> Mark,
>
> I have gotten better results from my 3.5 Summaron on my IIIf then on  
> my M8. I don't know why this is. I always though my results on film  
> were pretty good. Of course I had nothing to compare it to. In LTM  
> mount the Elmar is not as good and the 2.8 Summaron is a collector's  
> item as only 5000 or so were made. And before I get interrogated on  
> why I don't use CV or Zeiss or any other brand lens, it's because I  
> don't want to. On the M8 I have a much larger selection of lenses to  
> compare to the 3.5 version. In those cases it looks very low  
> contrast to just about any M lens I own. So I will continue to enjoy  
> the lens on my LTM bodies and be very happy with it.
>
> Len
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2008, at 6:44 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>> The f3.5 Summaron is no doubt a different ballgame from the 2.8 but  
>> I will
>> say I'm not experiencing any lack of contrast with it and is my  
>> most used
>> lens when shooting LTM which is my main mode of shooting Leica over  
>> the past
>> several years. Its results do not appear to be all that different  
>> from most
>> other lenes I've used. Some day I'll be working from top grade  
>> scans from
>> these negs or a digital M and make 17x22 prints from them but as of  
>> now I'd
>> recommend these lenes which are handy, accessible, not all that  
>> pricey and
>> at least "nice" performers. If the Leica fingerprint of this older  
>> design is
>> there its something which even in the darkroom I'd think would be  
>> dealable
>> by using a 3 contrast filter instead of a 2.5. Or another minute in  
>> the
>> developer. When working with scans you never as I said - see it.  
>> I'd not
>> mind a lens for me to use with some real noticeable different  
>> character.
>> Fore a different look. A distinctive fingerprint. My f3.5 Summaron  
>> gives me
>> farily normal results from all I can tell.
>>
>>
>>
>> mark@rabinergroup.com
>> Mark William Rabiner
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Leonard Taupier <len-001@verizon.net>
>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:37:45 -0500
>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question
>>>
>>> Seth,
>>>
>>> Your review in VF Vol 37 No 4 is very impressive. It's probably the
>>> most comprehension review of any lens I've ever seen. After you
>>> mentioned the 2.8 Summaron I went searching the web for it. Yup it's
>>> gotten up there in price. I wish I had one as that generation of
>>> Leica lenses give me the look I really like.
>>>
>>> Len
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 10, 2008, at 5:27 PM, Seth Rosner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Greg, it is why eBay prices for the 35/2,8 Summaron have risen
>>>> recently. The 3/4 sensor eliminates the corner fall-off in both
>>>> resolution and contrast and reduces to a hardly perceptible minimum
>>>> this lens' field curvature. Not owning an M8 (yet) I cannot confirm
>>>> my opinon that this lens will now outperform the 35 Summicrons
>>>> right up until the ASPH version while preserving the well-known
>>>> Leica look of the period. The legend that this lens lacks contrast
>>>> is simply untrue. And stopped down to 5,6, it is not too far from
>>>> the ASPH version. See VIEWFINDER Vol 37 No 4, pp 39-40.
>>>>
>>>> Seth
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Lorenzo"
>>>> <gregj_lorenzo@hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "Leica Users Group LUG" <lug@leica-users.org>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:50 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: [Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The 35 I'd use would have to have the right look (for me). This
>>>> probably means not the latest version of Leica's current 35mm lens
>>>> line.
>>>>
>>>> Greg Lorenzo
>>>> Calgary, Canada> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:44:52 -0500> Subject:
>>>> Re: [Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question> From:
>>>> mark@rabinergroup.com> To: lug@leica-users.org> > If you're used to
>>>> 50's then with an M8 I'd find a nice 35 to have be your> favorite
>>>> lens.> 35 * 1.33> = 46.55> > > A 50 gives you 65. Not so much an
>>>> "all around" lens.> > > > mark@rabinergroup.com> Mark William
>>>> Rabiner> > > > > From: Alan Magayne-Roshak <amr3@uwm.edu>> > Reply-
>>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>> > Date: Tue, 9 Dec
>>>> 2008 23:25:52 -0600 (CST)> > To: lug <lug@leica-users.org>> >
>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question> > > > Original
>>>> Message:> >> Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 16:52:43 -0500> >> From: Leonard
>>>> Taupier <len-001@verizon.net>> > > >> The 50mm collapsible
>>>> Summicron has absolutely no problem when> >> collapsed on the M8
>>>> body. The clearance from the end of the collapsed> >> mount to the
>>>> M8 shutter is about 1/2". I don't know about the 90mm> >> Elmar.
>>>> But if you have the lens just measure the distance from the> >>
>>>> mount to the end of the collapsed lens. The M8 flange to shutter>
>>>>>> distance is about 31/32". If the collapsed lens is 3/4" or
>>>> greater> >> from mount to end I probably would not collapse it when
>>>> on the M8. In> >> any case I have a few collapsible lenses with
>>>> adequate clearance but> >> always keep them extended as leica
>>>> recommends. The 90mm macro which> >> Leica says is OK does not
>>>> extend pass the lens mount at all.> >
>>>> __________________________________________________________________>
>>>>> Thanks for the information(Nathan too).> > > > I have collapsible
>>>> Summicrons in both bayonet and LTM, plus the 90 Elmar> >
>>>> collapsible, and I use that feature all the time, so I wondered if
>>>> these would> > work if I won the lottery and was able to get an
>>>> M8. ;~)> > > > > > Alan> > > > Alan Magayne-Roshak, Senior
>>>> Photographer> > UPAA POY 1978> > University Information Technology
>>>> Services> > University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee> > http://
>>>> gallery.leica-users.org/v/Alan+Magayne-Roshak/> > > > > > > > > >
>>>> _______________________________________________> > 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
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills.
>>>> http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?
>>>> ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_speed_122008
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>> information
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ----------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.16/1841 - Release Date:
>>>> 12/10/2008 9:30 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question)
Message from len-001 at verizon.net (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] M-lenses on M8 - A Question)