Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/02/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ric, I also wear glasses, trifocals for many years. With a 35 on my IIIf, I use the CV metal brightline finder, with the back rim covered with a ring of black felt to avoid scratches on my glasses. I use the same approach with the camera eyepieces. Let us know if the light leak has been cured. Jim Nichols Tullahoma, TN USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ric Carter" <ricc@embarqmail.com> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 6:04 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] LTM versus M > Interesting that the topic should come up today. My IIIf came home today > after a couple of years at camp having a light leak investigated. They > really do feel wonderful in the hands, so small and solid. > > I trotted it back out today at lunch for a little street work. Hacked > some leader off a roll of Fujicolor 400 and it loaded just fine (so far > as I can tell). > > Afraid I REALLY do miss exposure automation. (Use an M7 most of the time) > I have little feel for light changes without using a meter. That makes > street work among high rises a real exposure pain. Will see how bad in a > couple of days. > > My other complaint is the viewfinder. Everything is tricky with glasses. > Today, I was using an old W-Nikkor 35/3.5--a really tiny thing. > Viewfinder is Nikon Varifocal. Again, use with glasses is frustrating. It > makes me want to try contacts. I've been told that the little CV 28/35 > Minifinder offers better relief. > > Ric Carter > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/ricc/ > > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Marc James Small wrote: > >> There have been some unflattering comparisons of the LTM cameras to the >> M bodies. Allow me a gentle dissent. >> >> First, it is an axiom of life that a warrior learns to use the weapons >> available and at hand. So, learn to use an LTM camera and the >> difficulties just drop away. Two different eyepieces, one for the RF >> and the other for the VF? Sure? So what: the 1.5X magnification on >> the later LTM cameras makes that RF more accurate than those on even the >> M3. Clipping film to load the camera? Yup. So what? I carry a Swiss >> Army Knife for such chores, and it takes all of, gee, 10 seconds? >> Separate slow-speed dial? Yeah. So what? A warrior learns to use the >> weapons at hand. >> >> Yes, the Contax II was a more user-friendly camera. It had a removable >> back. It had a combined RF/VF, arguably the best in any mass-produced >> RF camera, bright and huge. The Leitz film cassette is from nowhere >> when compared to the magnificent Zeiss Ikon cassette, later thefted by >> Nikon and produced by them into the 1980's, while the Ukrainian rip-off >> is pretty good, as well. And in the Contax system, you can put a >> cassette both as the film supply and as the take-up, a really handy >> function if you are too weak after seven days of photography (har-har: >> seven days of photography makes one weak -- Sorry for that one, Walt!) >> to rewind the film. By 1940, most of the hard-country photojournalists >> had switched from Leica to Contax but the many virtues of the system are >> forgotten today. >> >> There is a second side to this. When I got my IIIc, after decades of >> lust, I picked up a lot of literature and learned how to flush the >> system out with doo-dads and gee-gaws and forced myself to learn to >> shoot as they did in the era of the Korean War. A IIIc with an APDOO >> self-timer and a Geiss Kontakt IIIc flash synchronizer is a delight. >> Avoid the Leitz Imarect, as it can only be called "lame" by charity, but >> there are other auxiliar VF's including those from Astro, Carl Zeiss, >> and TEWE which fill the bill admirably. The delight of taking the IIIc >> on a shoot is that the working is that of 1950. Want a telephoto? >> Great! Pick up a Visoflex I, a sports shutter release, and a 4.5/20cm >> Telyt, and, my gosh, you might be back shooting the 1936 Winter >> Olympics. In realistic terms, unless you score a 4.5/21 CZ Biogon in >> LTM -- one of mine, alas, was converted to M BM, but it is my regular >> wide-angle for my M cameras -- the widest you can reasonably go is a >> 2.8/3.5cm CZJ Biogon T or a Jupiter-12, either of which works admirably. >> >> So, when I have somewhere to go which I wish to document but where the >> results are of no fiscal or societal value, I'm always split between the >> IIIc and a Conax II. But then, there is always that Werra 3, with its >> 1/750" Prestor. So little time! So many choices! Best to take the >> Hasselblad SWC or the Rolleiflex 2.8GX .... hmm. >> >> But do not sell LTM gear short. Wonderful cameras, wonderful system, >> wonderful access to some grand lenses. Want telephoto? I can do >> 28/2600 on my Questar or 13/1000 on my Swift 831 or 4/300 on my >> Pan-Tele-Kilar, not to mention 5/40cm with my Telyt. >> >> The IIIc and Contax RF cameras were fully evolved systems. Do not sell >> them short. And it is a worthy thing to learn how the great pictures of >> the past were made. >> >> Again, a warrior uses the weapons at hand. >> >> Marc >> >> >> >> >> msmall@aya.yale.edu >> Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir! >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >