Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I often use the elmar 50 - 2.8 collapsible on my M8, I find it to be a very sharp and also soft lens, cf this portrait of my brother in law Bernard. Not too good for landscapes, though. Jean-Michel<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Jean-Michel/PORTRAITS/PORTRAITS.jpg.html> > Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 16:51:41 -0400 > From: mark at rabinergroup.com > To: lug at leica-users.org > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film! > > When my X, Karen who many of you know got her M6 a decade back her choice > of > glass was the modern 50 2.8 Elmar collapsible which she got in "chrome". I > was very envious of it but now have thanks to a LUG friend a very old 3.5 > 50 > Elmar collapsible which came with my IIIF. I do feel very Barnack like when > shooting with it. The results I've gotten with it for me have plenty of > resonance; glow; fingerprint. Though I have a 3.5 35mm Summaron and a 90 > elmar I only get this feeling when using the 50 which I believe is decades > older. > > Mark William Rabiner > Photography > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > From: Jim Nichols <jhnichols at lighttube.net> > > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:07:32 -0500 > > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film! > > > > George, > > > > I think you will find that the 50mm 2.8 Elmar is the exception to the > > rule. > > It was a modernization and slight improvement on the 50/3.5 Elmar, and > > kept > > the same name. > > > > Jim Nichols > > Tullahoma, TN USA > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "George Lottermoser" <imagist3 at mac.com> > > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 2:55 PM > > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film! > > > > > >> > >> On Jul 14, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote: > >> > >>> 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. > >> > >> I thought 2.8 always = elmarit > >> no? > >> > >> Regards, > >> George Lottermoser > >> george at imagist.com > >> http://www.imagist.com > >> http://www.imagist.com/blog > >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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