spydrxx

At $800 discount I wouldn't worry unless you see signs of other issues.

Double, double toil and trouble...don't fret. The chip is irrelevant unless you plan to sell the lens, then a knowlegable buyer will demand a discount. The chip should have no noticeable effect on image quality.

The flange distance for SLR lenses is much greater than that of rangefinder lenses to accommodate the mirror. While you may be able to mount the lenses on the SLR, as others indicated, you will only have macro focus, as if they were being used with extension rings on a rangefinder body. As shown above, Leica did make several longer focal length lenses for use on the Visoflex, which converts the rangefinder body into a somewhat clumsy SLR, and with the proper adapter these will focus to infinity on SLR bodies. I hope this explanation helps you understand the differences.

Taken at Chicago's "Bean" in Millinium Park a few years ago. Between my lens and the natural curvature of the Bean, I think it introduced bizarre distortion and perspective.

It is nice to have a deep rear lens cap when needed. I got a couple from Ebay a few years ago, and use them as desired. As for transporting your lens, any Leica M cap will do. BTW, it is not a good idea to store any lens in a bag....darkness and trapped moisture are invitations for fungus spores to multiply. Best to store lenses in relatively low humidity environment with free air circulation or another good alternative is a tight box with a silica gel bag.

Everything is hyped these days

I'd take it to a trained Leica technician (don't know where you live). Even if it is water or grease evaporation, I'd get it either cleaned or have the glass repaired. Personally I can live with minor issues and inconveniences, but having clear focusing is a must in my book. YMMV

I guess the answer in my book would be what is your current setup not delivering that you wish to achieve? I did most of my scanning with an much smaller rez camera (non-Leica) and although I own a new hi rez body (again non-Leica), I haven't tried it for scanning purposes, because I'm getting good results with my old setup (printing 3x4 ft prints). Not exhibition quality, but for me that's irrelevant, most of my prints are on canvas with 6-7 ft viewing distances. I guess if you have the spare cash or are planning to make money off your prints, you may see a very nominal improvement.

I think you will have better results with the 28 than the 21, which IMHO it is more difficult to avoid distortion by not having the camera perfectly level and/or shooting too close to the subject. So my recommendation is the 28 + 50. Enjoy your visit.

BGN="bargain" grade

Hi Ishay and welcome to the forum. Can you elaborate on why you are having difficulty deciding between the two lenses? If it is in the rendering, I encourage you to search the forum for discussions of each and look at some of the shots taken with each. How do they mesh with your shooting style and/or subjects. Having owned both, I can only say I enjoyed using each as well as the results they produced.

My first Leica camera and lens were bought new in 1969. Since then almost all of my lenses and bodies have been bought used, and like others mentioned, there are things to check to ensure you are getting what you expect and pay for. Last year was the first time since 1969 that I've bought a lens for my Leica gear new, and it wasn't manufactured by Leica! Patience is a virtue in the second-hand market, and it is often rewarded. Unless you're a collector instead of a user, minor imperfections often are irrelevant, but can drastically affect the price. Fashionistas pay up, the rest of us benefit from their mistakes. Besides dealers, I've had phenomenal luck with Ebay and purchased all over the world. The key is to ask good questions of sellers and don't be afraid to walk away. Good luck in your endeavors.

IMHO a better idea on the Visoflex is to get an LTM->M adapter ring (these are inexpensive and plentiful). That way you not only can use the Visoflex with your M body, but if at sometime you decide to get a Barnack body you can use it there s well.

Although this topic has been covered ad nauseum in previous posts (which for some reason people don't bother to search for), it is always helpful to remind people that there can be multiple reasons for using a UV filter.

Likewise, mine has numbers scratched in int indicating it was at some point adjusted for the acual focal length of the lenshead. Of course when mounted on the Visoflex or bellows that doesn't matter. When you do find a focus tube, I'd encourage you to take it and the head to a competent repairperson and have him properly calibrate it for your M body. IMHO it is a fine lens, which exceeded my expectations.