Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Good comments Mark, but the small framelines are not so bad in the HM version, and even with the .72, I've always found them quite adequate: on the plus side, it makes you concentrate a bit harder if your images were not right last time. As for soft focus, again, I don't have a problem focusing the 90 or the 135, and like any camera system, you have to remember to give it a bit of a chance with a faster shutter travel. For portraits, that softness may help and here I can always reach for the Summarex ;-) Cheers On Friday, Jun 27, 2003, at 12:19 Australia/Melbourne, Mark Rabiner wrote: > Jerry Lehrer wrote: >> >> Alastair >> >> The SummArex is almost as good a soft focus lens as the >> Thambar plus "disc". >> >> Jerry >> >> Alastair Firkin wrote: >> > I know I'd be able to give a much better response if i know how Doug's > new 90 was going to be used. Subject matter? transparency's or black > and > white. How big are the blow ups? 4x6 proofs? Inkjet? how big. What did > you have for breakfast last Tuesday? What kind of lens on your slide > projector and what kind of surface is it projected on. And at what > magnification? > > If, like most of us Doug is getting 4x6's of his kids or grand kids > back > from the "drugstore" Doug should just get the Elmar made in the late > 60's and the basis for our Elmarit now. Interrupted by the Tele-Elmarit > out controversial compact version of which I am one of the nay sayers. > > The 90 is a lens which many get and don't like no matter what version > they get. They are heavy for the most part and the framelines are > small. > You get the pictures back and half of them are soft. Half of those soft > ones you've missed your focus the other half you've used too slow of a > shutter speed. The last group you've got birthday cake all over your > UV filter. > > Lots of people want to skip the 50. Not accusing you of anything Doug! > :) > > But lots of people get their 35 and for reach they get a 90. > For the most part a bad decision. > > Let the 50 be your "reach." It does get in there. At least make sure > you > have a 50 first. > > I'll say that your typical pull over to the side of the road and get > picture kind of picture is a 90. > > And a 90 makes a much better "portrait" lens than a 50. Unless that is > you like a 21 for those! > > > Mark Rabiner > Portland, Oregon USA > http://www.rabinergroup.com > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > Alastair - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html