New R8 - slides

[n5xrd@juno.com (Richard W. Hemingway)]

LUGs,

Well I got back the second batch of slides I took with my new R8. 
Kodachrome 25.  I could compare them with some slides I had taken with
the M6 and 35/1.4 ASPH, which were extremely sharp.  

With the R8 I used the 24/2.8. 50/2.0 and 90/2.8.  Most of the slides
were taken inside a mall  and a restaurant to see how well I could hand
hold the R8 at slow speeds. Some were taken outside and others on a
tripod with the MLU.  I projected them on a 70 x 70 matt screen with a
Pradovit P002 projector with 90/2.5 colorplan-P CF lens.  I changed from
the super colorplan-P FF lens as the slides were not projected as flat in
the corners.

First the exposures with the R8 seem to entirely consistent between the 
spot, average and matrix metering.  The average metering does seem to
give about 1/2 stop less exposure most of the time.  Al l exposures were
acceptable, which is one of the strengths I hoped for from the R8.

At first I thought that the 35/1.4 ASPh was giving sharper slides than
the 50/2.0 -R but on examination of the large projected images, there
seemed to be little difference.  Flower pictures taken at the near
extreme of the focusing limit of the lens with the MLU were sharp,
especially the 90/2.8 (at f/8.0) - not quite as good as with the 100/2.8
ARP I once had.

I found that several images I took, hand held at 1/15th were acceptable -
this was a surprise as I was not able to hold an R7 I used to have at
this speed and get much of any image.  Some of the R8 images at this
speed were blurred to the point they were not usable.  This is about the
ratio I get with the M6, perhaps the M6 is a little better.

I also projected the slides with the Super Colorplan-P.  The central
sharpness was a tad better and the color saturation also. As it is FF the
edges were not in as good focus as with the CF.  Ah, which to use???

I also projected the slides with a Leica Pradolux RT-300 projector (made
by Singer) with the older colorplan 90/2.5 CF lens.  The new CF lens may
be marginally better in sharpness. Intrestingly I also used this older CF
lens with a Kodak Ektagraphic III projecor I used to have (gave it to my
daughter) and I could not get acceptably flat projection with cardboard
mount slides with either that CF lens or a FF lens.  But they work great
with the Leica projectors.  I keep the RT-300 as I can use a Kodak stack
loader with it.

Upshot - I think Ted is right (again - darn it).  I can't tell any
practical difference between the M and R lenses, at least not for the
purposes I now take pictures - for projection. Maybe I could have if I
were still using a darkroom.

More decisions: Keep the M6 and 35/ ASPH or sell it and get three R
lenses with a little money left.  (Used R lenses seem considerably
cheaper (if that word can be used with Leica) than used M lenses.
Sorry I ran on so long.  The later it gets the longer I ramble.

Richard Hemingway
Norman, OK