Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 16:16:45 -0400

Yes I see now that a 2.8 was made (1957-1974). My Leica resource books used
to be very handy and complete.
 15-blade diaphragm

Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/


> From: Daniel Ridings <dlridings at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:27:52 +0200
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
> 
> Well, I have several of those too, Mark. When I wrote "old" I meant
> the old 50/2.8 not the modern "new" 50/2.8 Elmar. I'd love to have one
> of those. I keep my eyes open every Friday.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
> wrote:
>> The old 50 elmar would be a 3.5 not 2.8?!?!?
>> 
>> - - from my iRabs.
>> Mark Rabiner
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Gene duprey <grduprey at mchsi.com>
>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 10:46:53 -0500 (CDT)
>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
>>> 
>>> Daniel,
>>> 
>>> How about some samples from that bottle cap lens? ;)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Gene
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Daniel Ridings" <dlridings at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 2:35:12 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
>>> 
>>> Well, we've brought up some of my cherished topics, Elmars and film,
>>> the last few days. Mark mentioned the 90/4 (or, as another Marc would
>>> protest 9cm f4.0 Elmar). So I pulled out one of mine. I was running a
>>> roll of Kentmere 100 through the paces. I couldn't find suggested
>>> times for Xtol, so I needed to see how my guesstimate would work out,
>>> before I trusted it.
>>> 
>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/dlridings/oddsnends/12v28-1.jpg.html
>>> 
>>> Somewhere in the settings, Vuescan or my LS-5000 thinks it is Jan 1,
>>> 2012. All my scans get dated by that. I'm really going to have to
>>> figure out where that is coming from.
>>> 
>>> As long as I was running some film though, I added the 50/2.8 Elmar to
>>> the brew (the old one, not the new very, very good one).
>>> 
>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/dlridings/oddsnends/12v28-2.jpg.html
>>> 
>>> 1/30 @ 2.8 I bought that one from a LUGer, John Collier? Can't really
>>> remember. It's been a few years ago now.
>>> 
>>> Then I myself was curious about how the Summitar, also wide open, would
>>> compare.
>>> 
>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/dlridings/oddsnends/12v28-4.jpg.html
>>> 
>>> The Summitar is probably more know for its out of focus character
>>> (won't really say "quality") than anything else. But I wanted a faster
>>> lens for the LTM and if you can find one in decent shape (pretty
>>> difficult task) they work just fine. The lens shade for my 50
>>> Summicron works on it, so I don't have to use the goofy barn-door one
>>> designed for the lens.
>>> 
>>> Here's the stuff.
>>> 
>>> 
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/dlridings/oddsnends/20120714-_DSC3839.jpg.ht
>> m>
>> l
>>> 
>>> The IIIg 50 and 90 is a nice compact combo. I lost my 35mm viewfinder
>>> in Oslo a couple of years back. It fell off the camera while I was
>>> walking around on 17th of May celebrations. Kind of pained me.
>>> 
>>> To be totally honest, I took some similar shots with my Nikon D300 and
>>> consumer zoom, 24-85 3.5-?? ... and I have to admit, they're better
>>> than the film scans. The negative might match the image from the D300,
>>> but by the time you scan it, it loses out. :-(
>>> 
>>> Daniel
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Chris Saganich <csaganich at gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> I have an ex pat friend in BK Th.  Let me know if you go.
>>>> 
>>>> Chris
>>>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Daniel Ridings <dlridings at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Tell me more, Jim. I feel there must be typo (wino?) in there. 32/4? I
>>>>> don't mind the Contax/Nikon mount (as long as it fits a Kiev) but
>>>>> 32/4? You compare with a 21 for Nikon or Contax. Are we talking about
>>>>> a decent wide-angle? I have the 21/4 in Voigtlander (if it's color
>>>>> Skopar or just Skopje, I don't remember ... decent lens).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Daniel
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:28 PM, jshulman at judgecrater.com
>>>>> <jshulman at judgecrater.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Welcome back to your senses. My only recommendation is to get the 32/4
>>>>> Voigtlander land in Contax/NIKON mount.  It's a sensational lens, and
>>>>> likely outperforms the rare NIKON 21 or the vintage Contax 21.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>>>>> From: "Phil Forrest" <photo.forrest at earthlink.net>
>>>>>> Date: Fri, Jul 13, 2012 3:18 pm
>>>>>> Subject: [Leica] Back to film!
>>>>>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A few folks here are also members on RFF and may have followed a few 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> my threads there but I finally shuffled off the digital monkey a few
>>>>>> days ago.
>>>>>> I traded my M9 (which I had been trying to sell for a while) for a
>>>>>> Nikon SP with titanium shutter and a good amount of cash. It was a 
>>>>>> good
>>>>>> deal, I think. I got a *reliable* camera that is compatible with most
>>>>>> of my lenses (I sold my Leica lenses and replaced them with RF 
>>>>>> Nikkors)
>>>>>> and the new M9 owner got a camera he wanted. I still have my film M4, 
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> beat up DR Summicron and my Super Angulon but I'm considering the sale
>>>>>> of the latter to replace it with the 2.1cm Nikkor for the F mount with
>>>>>> adapter. An excellent lens itself but much lower cost.
>>>>>> I'm happy because I am no longer tethered to a wall socket to recharge
>>>>>> batteries. Film doesn't have a slow buffer time. I can forget about my
>>>>>> latent images on the roll for a while and not worry about filling up 
>>>>>> my
>>>>>> limited storage media. It's just a good move. I'm not getting any 
>>>>>> photo
>>>>>> business and I can't rationalize sitting on almost $5000 worth of
>>>>>> camera that isn't making me money.
>>>>>> It was kind of fun while it lasted even though the headaches of M9
>>>>>> unreliability (and the M8 before it) drove me nuts. I should have sold
>>>>>> it a year ago.
>>>>>> It's good to be back to film. It feels rebellious, actually.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Phil Forrest
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> http://philipforrestphoto.wordpress.com/
>>>>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/philforrest
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Chris Saganich
>>>> www.imagebrooklyn.com
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




Replies: Reply from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] IMG: Back to film!)
In reply to: Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] IMG: Back to film!)