[Leica] Tmax 3200 (att: Bill)

[daniel.ridings at edd.uio.no (Daniel Ridings)]

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, bill harting wrote:

(the shots are here: http://gallery.leica-users.org/Tmax-3200 )

> collapsible (excellent performer that it is) that is my main 50, and I see
> 40mms available from time to time at affordable prices. Yet for years I 
> have
> used a 35 (no eyes) on my M3 and used the outer edge of what can been seen
> in the finder as my "frame", successfully -- but then I'm not that
> particular about the edges (often I am surprised). Is this the same issue?
> wrong framelines? how about the quality of the lens (looks good to me).

It's pretty much the same issue Bill. So I think it's something one can
nail down with a little experience. I checked out what an external 40
viewfinder (Cosina) would cost me and I definitely think that one can get
by with the M3's whole viewfinder with a little experience. I made the
mistake of using the 50 frames and then adding some around it instead of
just using what I see through the frames. The 40 calls up the 50
framelines.

As far as the lens goes ... in my opinion it is really worth the effort of
gaining that experience in framing because the lens is a beauty. I think I
would prefer it to my 35 Summicron if I got the composition issue nailed
down. It's been sitting around for years (the CL is only a shutter-box, no
working rangefinder or meter). Every now and then I pick it up and am
always pleased with it. Every time.

> skintones in exactly the right place as to density. Even 0010, which on the
> tube seems to lose the right edge of the stove has everything else it needs
> to be a correct exposure.

Yeah, number 10 was the torture test. A black cast-iron stove in a dark
room, metering for the little light that fell on to the left side.

I'm really quite amazed at Kodak's Tmax films. They are very very stubborn
about giving up shadow detail. The grain comes out, but that doesn't
bother me much at all.

The grain, particularly 06, looks quite nice on a print. It's definitely
there, but it's not distracting. But I've understood that grain is a
subjective thing. It doesn't bother me at all.

The "ringmaster" for these jam sessions heard that I was just taking b/w
and responded (hopefully): "You mean the good grainy kind?".

> you find other ways to do what you have to do. And it works. I'm out of TMZ
> at the moment, got to order some more right away.

Don't wait too long. I had to pay a premium because most places were out
of it (one place was going to get in 2 rolls ... TWO?!). So once I found
it I just had to pay what they were asking. Much more expensive than if I
ordered it from my normal supplier.

But I do think I'll keep it at 3200. I like the idea of getting some
shadow detail in the pub. After a couple of rolls (and beers to steady my
hands) I might even back down to 1600 so I can see what it looks like when
I go for the whole tonal range. It's a really nice film.

Thanks for the exchange!

Best,
Daniel