Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]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