Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Time for Reflection M-P Kobalux 21mm f2.8
  3. Does 75 2.4 focus ring is also rubber made? Here is VM 75 1.5 ASPH. Rubber free construction.
  4. Good Day to be Inside M8 Kobalux 21mm f2.8
  5. I had three film M but sold down to one. Just don't need this many film M, since I have other film cameras. M3 would balance well with 50 Lux Pre-Asph v1 and collapsible Cron. Both lenses gives awesome pictures. M5 should be fine for bigger 50. Personally, I'm not finding SLRs to be better for portraits. Manual focus SLRS doesn't have simplicity of RF focusing. AF SLRs have limited focus points areas. You could get goggled Leica M tele lens to have more in VF for framing. Most interest portraits I have seen are in HCB "inner silence". I think he used Leica RF. Jane Bown portraits are also interesting, but...
  6. It found a duplicate file name somewhere. It could even be on the SD card. Unless you do a forensic-level reformat, no data are erased, they are only disabled and can be overwritten. If you use an SD rescue program it is not unusual to find ancient files on the card, despite multiple formats.
  7. Today
  8. If anyone is interested I am selling an unopened one that will be arriving from Adorama by this Thursday on Fred Miranda. I already bought one back in December from another user. Here is the link to the listing. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1642200/0?keyword=leica,sl2#15193915
  9. At the tavern. Istanbul 2008. Meyhanede. İstanbul 2008.
  10. Little Tele, Big Picture M-P Canon 50mm f1.2 @1.2
  11. Can't say as I disagree with you. There is no expectation on my part that the V10mm can be the same as the SWC... but then I don't think it's really possible for any other camera to be exactly the same. To me, it's a matter of what can produce satisfying photos with a similar feel. If you want an SWC, there really isn't any choice but to buy one and enjoy it. Nothing else is ever going to do just exactly that, not even the 907x+ XCD21 I'm currently using. But other choices can make some very satisfying photos too. G
  12. Indeed. I just wanted to point out that 6x9 was probably more prevalent than 6x6. In amateur use contact prints were quite common.
  13. As I noted above (60x90). Jeff
  14. 645 goes back to the early 1900's.... https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/history-of-645-format.411296/ Mamiya 645 was introduced in 1975. By the 80's, other companies followed, and was fairly well known to me at least in my early film days (from mid 70's on). In any case, I only mentioned 645 since it's smaller than 6x6, which is typically the size one uses to suggest that digital MF sensors are smaller than typical MF film sizes (and the Hasselblad 500 goes back to the 50's as best I recall). Plus, as I noted, 6x6 was hardly the largest MF film size. I'm well aware of the history of photography (including 19th century), as a long time student and print and book collector. But I hardly think about photography in the early 1900's when film vs digital comparisons emerge, however flawed those might be. Most young photographers today, when they hear about digital MF, really have no idea about film history, let alone the very early days, so I was limiting comparisons to popular formats during my formative and current years (as a near 70 year old). In fact, if I say 4x5, most young photographers today wouldn't know if that meant mm, cm, inches, or whatever. Anyway, I was merely addressing Gordon's comment and trying to keep it simple. Jeff
  15. There is no image in any computer file, just instructions for a program to create an image on your screen.
  16. Yesterday
  17. I agree with Philip: I’ve checked a lot of well known lenses for focus shift in recent years, and every fast lens I’ve checked carefully has shown some amount of shift stopping from wide open. DAG noted that when I asked him to calibrate focus on a couple of 50 Summicrons from the 50s-60s. He noted the design had shift, so Leica calibrated them at 2.8, so shift would be minimized between f2.0 and f4 to 5.6. (Slight front focus at f2, slight back at f4.) I used the 35 1.4 Nokton ver1 for some years and had generally great results, but checking closely on outdoor shots sometimes the sharpest focus would be details behind the subject. Didn’t notice at normal viewing distance. But when I really tested the lens I relegated it to dim light use at f1.4 to 2.0. It was quite good at 2.0 - a bit better than my 70 Summicron 35. When I got an M10 I switched to a Summarit 2.5. Another lens I like is the 50 Nickel Heliar 2.0, but it has more focus shift than the 35 1.4 Nokton ver 1. For my M9 now I like the 35 Nokton 1.4 ver2. It tamed the focus shift to very usable levels.
  18. Not from a historical perspective, even if you limit the term 'medium format' to 120 roll film. 645 was only popular for the last 15 years or so of the 100 year history of medium format, and even then it was arguably less popular than 6x6.
  19. I just wish that more applications supported the crop info that is embedded in the DNG. I've put in enhancement requests for a number of applications but there's been no movement yet.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy