Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Thanks Mark. I need to get a big printer. Shot at f4 if I remember > correctly. I do find myself wanting a bit more speed sometimes > though - more for the isolation at middle distances (isolation with > context?) rather than low light ability. Have to agree with your > assessment of CV; problem is, there are some lenses that Leica just > doesn't make like the 12 and 15 heliars (the WATE doesn't count - > it's HUGE!) and the 35 Nokton. Get the 15 if you can. The M mount > version I have seems better than the LTM version I tested, but it > could be due to tolerances in the adaptor (saw some decentering) > rather than a problem with the glass itself. I believe the optical > design is the same. > > Ming > > On May 26, 2009, at 1:12 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > >> I'm very fond of the shot the busyness is the main point of the shot; >> Less busy; Less shot. >> And it this higher resolution on the screen I can almost start to >> really >> appreatate the amazingness of the 35mm Summicron ASPH. An >> astounding ground >> breaking optic. >> Would love to see this shot printed 17x22". >> A bit high key for me this rendition you might want to see if the >> shot reads >> more satisfyingly with a slightly more richer tonality. Darker. >> Nice blacks >> though. >> The Summicron name to me and lots of people is the main Leica >> brand and what >> Leica is all about. But we usually have a Summilux 1.4 option. >> A Summicron being a Summicron; and a Summilux being a Summilux. >> Personally I find f1.4 to be an SLR thing and f 2 to be very much a >> rangefinder thing. >> In the case of the 35 you can't even tell the lenses apart till >> you see the >> labels. Same filter size; same shape almost the same weight. The >> 1.4 just >> cost another grand. USD. >> This looks like a 5.6 shot to me though. >> And its not as if f1.4 helps you see through the viewfinder better >> and snap >> the image on the groundless more reassuringly. No groundglass. >> Leica m. >> >> Cosina Voigtl?nder optics are inspired and enviable alternates for >> a Leica >> camera. But there is a reason why they are 2 or 3 price points >> below that of >> Leica. Glass choices, tolerances. Quality control. They are just >> not Leica >> glass. For someone who cant swing thousands of dollars to buy a >> new lens its >> the only option. But if I did have the money I'd go for the Leica >> every >> time. Go for the best glass every time. Leica coincidently is >> probably the >> best glass ever made bar none and we get to put it on your >> cameras. If we >> have the money. >> >> Coincidently I'm very fond of using a lens made by Cosina a chrome >> 45mm 2.8 >> P for pancake on my D40x. >> http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/45.htm >> >> And I have my eye on getting both the 12 and 15 for my Leica system; >> But as of late have been preferring to get LTM (screw mount) Leica >> glass so >> as to be able to use them on both my Leica systems my main one >> being my IIIF >> LTM. >> >> The 21 I could see getting for its compactness as I leave my 21 >> home for >> many an excursion for that reason. >> >> >> Mark William Rabiner > > > THEIN Onn Ming *photohorologer ming at www.mingthein.com www.flickr.com/mingthein