Jump to content

urs0polar

Members
  • Posts

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Country
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks guys. I don't think it's separation exactly. It looks as if someone opened the lens to clean haze off of an internal element but didn't clean all the way to the edge of the element... the front retaining ring looks (under very close inspection) like the person didn't use the correct tool (the slots are a tiny bit damaged). I think what happened is that an internal element had haze on it for whatever reason (perhaps an overzealous oiling of aperture blades earlier in its life?), so the person opened it via the front ring, cleaned the haze off as best they could, then re-assembled the lens. Under the flashlight test, the haze left around the outer edge of the element shows up. While that's great for them that they cleaned it, I'm not so sure it's great for me, what with resale value and all. It's a pity because this is the exact lens I've been looking for - a tabbed 50 summicron-m. Oh well, back to the drawing board. Thanks again.
  2. Rick, I just saw your post, sorry about the late reply. I must have a bad dandelion chip. I have it on a M645-EOS adapter from Fotodiox, and it's pretty unuseable. I'm glad to hear other people don't have the issue -- I've learned to live without it honestly and all the adapters (Leica R-EOS) I've ordered since haven't had it and i've been fine. The key with the (original) 5D is to change the focusing screen. So, focusing screens, I have an original 5D only, and I changed the focusing screen on it myself to the ees one i think it is; it's the one where the whole thing is a microprism, akin to the Leica SL screens. It's really sad if the focusing screen in the 5DIII is not user-replaceable.... I was hoping to upgrade some day. So, I don't have any Leica R on Nikon, but I do shoot M645 via an unchipped Fotodiox adapter on my F5, and the confirmation arrows and lights work great and are very responsive and fast. I would imagine the Leica R's that have been Leitaxed (horrors!) would be the same? Someone needs to invent a digital back for the SL...
  3. Thanks James, Yeah it's definitely not a reflection. I guess I should send it back and wait for a better one. There don't seem to be a lot of tabbed Summicron IVs around right now. Thanks again
  4. Hi, I recently received a new-to me 50mm Summicron-M (with the focusing tab, serial # says it was made in 1991) that I find a strange result doing the "flashlight test". It seems there's an element inside that either has leftover cement on it or wasn't adequately cleaned, etc. I've posted a video where the stuff i'm talking about comes into focus at 0:10. It's in a ring around the outer edge of one of the internal elements. This view is from the rear of the lens. There is a hair and some dust on the rear of the rear element, but I'm not as worried about that obviously. I tried it on my M8, and it's extremely sharp and looks amazing, but I'm wondering if I should send it back because of this stuff on the inside element... I put the video on youtube Any help would be greatly appreciated!
  5. I have a dandelion chip in an M645-EOS adapter from Fotodiox, and it is outright terrible. It takes over a second to light up, and by then I've moved, or the subject has moved, and thus it rarely if ever lights up. It really sucks. So, I just got the manual focus fucus-screen for it, and I focus like it's an SL, never worrying about the stupid confirmation light. The confirmation lights work great on Nikon with no chip (as long as your adapter pretends to be AIS) but like crap on EOS with the chip. It's pretty useless; I wouldn't pay extra for the chip. My Leica R to EOS adapter has no chip, and with the right focus screen, I don't miss focus confirmation.
  6. Though I only have Macs at home and I love them, it's not technically true that they will be much faster than any Windows machine, especially for advanced photoshop stuff. The Mac Pro is out of date hardware-wise compared to modern PC offerings ... sad, but true. There is no Mac solution that can do a 10-bit workflow either (https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3600350?start=0&tstart=0). Apple is starting to scare a lot of people with their disregard for the high-end media market in favor of iOS and making things nice for grandma. You and I may not care, but all those ad agencies and graphics design houses and architecture offices and recording studios and editing houses aren't going to hang around much longer I would imagine. That said, it is still a much nicer experience IMO than Windows, especially with Unix underneath, and I'll stick with it for now, hoping the next release will be less Launchpad and more ZFS. (Of course, if you are using iPhoto, then yeah the mac will be much nicer than anything PC for ease-of-use -- but not faster)
  7. I was thinking the same thing. Prices aren't bad for it either. I'd be giving up full frame, but gaining more usability. Then there's the A99. See, it's not that hard to convince each other to spend money!
  8. Uh-oh, now the market is ruined for those as well! (Make sure the lenses you would use on it are not ROM or 3rd-cam though if you choose an SL)
  9. Hi Jono, I can see where you are coming from. I have a Canon 5D (The first one) that I use for all my R lenses, and without live view, I pretty much only shoot wide open unless It's on a tripod (which it never is). So, for me, it's not as fluid of an experience as the film R bodies (and I love film anyhow so I'm not complaining too much). It sounds like I've got to get me a 5DII or an A77 like you or something similar so I can have live view etc and get out of the digital stone age Then in 6 years I'll upgrade to a used M240.
  10. Hi K-Hawinkler, Thank you for the reply -- I don't take offense; I always enjoy reading your posts and learning from you and all the others on here with lots of knowledge and information to share. I have a similar story to yours in a way. I started this whole money pit camera fetish with a Nikon D50 (of all things) back in 2005 or so. Then, my friend and I dared each other to get a Mamiya RB67 and shoot medium format film because it would be theoretically cheaper than buying new digital bodies every few years (how wrong we were...). Many other formats and fun followed, BUT, I always wanted a Leica. I happened upon a R8 with 50/1.4 for a great price locally on craigslist, and as soon as I got that, EVERYTHING (except my Technika 4x5) felt cheap. Uh-oh! Some more (well priced) R glass followed, along with an M6, and recently picking up a well-used M8, R3, and SL. So, maybe I have a special spot for the R stuff because the R8 was my first Leica, and it was really an entirely different experience. I still lug it around everywhere. You know, in a way, I should be very happy -- M240 folks will want R lenses in R mounts, which is ultimately good for us R-lovers. Between the motion-picture aperture de-clickers and the leitaxers, less and less R lenses are on the market anyhow (at least Leitaxing is reversible). Maybe this will bring some of them back. You probably knew I might say this, but you should pick up a nice SL or R8/R9 to go with your R lenses so you can shoot film as well as digital with M240/M9; one wind of the film advance on the SL and you'll be hooked, guaranteed
  11. K-Hawinkler and Jono, In my earlier post, my point was not that putting R glass on the M240 is completely useless; on the contrary, it's probably going to be nice. My point, which I admit was perhaps obscured in my rant, is that people who don't already have R glass lying around and are buying it *solely* in anticipation of the new M240 are likely to be disappointed as it's not going to be as nice as an M lens on an M body or an R lens on an R body or, secondarily, a DSLR. This is my opinion, I don't mind if you guys think different. As andyedward said: "Will people who currently shoot sans tripod suddenly start using one when their M240 and R glass arrive? I dont think so. Perhaps some of the R lenses currently being snapped up by those waiting for an M240 will return to the market at a more realistic price a few months after the M240 starts shipping?" My thoughts are right along these lines, and I hope so. Guys like K-H are already using their M9s as mirrorless backs for R glass evidently (to wonderful effect, I might add), and that proves what I perceive to be Andy's point: If that's your thing, you are already doing it with the M9; this M240 is going to be better and easier, but you are already doing it. There are already adapters on the market for R to NEX, for instance (Sony just announced a full-frame NEX too, by the way). So, if that's the case, there are lot of people who evidently are *not* doing it, but who are buying all the cool R lenses in anticipation of this magical synergy between the M240 and R glass. I feel that some of them are going to be disappointed. I hope they aren't, for their sake. Anyhow, I'm accused by K-H of sour grapes; indeed, he is correct I really enjoy my film R system and hope to afford the nicer, newer R glass some day. On the M side, all I can afford is older (like 1950's-1960's) M/LTM lenses and modern Zeiss/Voigtlander glass -- for R, I can afford some really nice more modern Leica glass as long as I use film (and/or the kinda crappy but useable solution of a Canon DSLR or NEX mirrorless or whatever). So I'm just a little sad that my foray into R glass seems to be at a close. That said, I have a few nice lenses that I really enjoy using, so I'm fine; and really, it was expensive even before the price hike. Oh well. Maybe we should all be out taking pictures instead of arguing anyway! Jono, for the auto-compensating liveview on the M240, when the lens is stopped down to the desired aperture, the combination of large DOF and high gain would still make focusing more difficult than the traditional auto-aperture of a SLR, wouldn't it? I obviously haven't handled an M240 but I would think it would work this way?
  12. Wow, $8k. Well this just spells the end of my Leica R acquisitions. I managed to get some really nice stuff before the M240 was announced... 35/2, 50/1.4, 60/2.8, 135/2.8, and 180/3.4 with a SL, R3 and R8. Now even the old 50 Summicrons are ridiculously priced. I always wanted an 80/1.4 and a 100/2.8; I passed when they were both $1400 a while back; now they are completely out of reach. By the way, this M240 as the R solution is really stupid in my opinion. Sorry, but it is. No EVF is going to be as good as an analog SLR for tracking motion and what have you. And the form factor is all off. And even if the EVF ends up being great, it's still not the same. The real "Digital R" solution still is one of the Canon FF DSLRs with manual focusing screen and an adapter (Leitaxing means you can't use it on a real R body and is therefore limiting IMO, even though I agree that Nikon's ergonomics are way better:)). The newer Canons have live view as well if you're into that aspect of it. The M240 is stop down metering anyways with R lenses, no? All the M240 did was get a lot of people who don't do their research excited enough to price those of us who shoot film R's out of the market. When they realize they basically bought a NEX for $7000 to shoot now astronomically expensive R lenses, and that it's unergonomic as hell, I hope they will be kind enough to sell me their 80/1.4 or 100/2.8 for a reasonable, pre-bubble price. Buy the new M for what it was designed for: shooting M lenses at higher ISOs than was previously possible. Geez. /rant
  13. I'm a mac guy, converted in 2005, but I think it's more than just this or that iteration of Mac/PC OS that makes the Apple experience great. It's about taste. OS X has "taste", and Windows doesn't. I think that's why Apple have so many ardent fans: when you use a Mac, it feels like someone put it together that way for a reason, even if some things are annoying -- later on you find that, even if it's still annoying, the purpose and the workflow become clear. With Windows, boneheaded nonsense like the ribbon bar still persist to this day. And what's up with Windows 8 getting rid of / obscuring the start button (evidently you can hack it back in, but come on). It truly feels as if the entire Windows OS was designed by committee on a Friday. Every once in a while it feels like someone at Microsoft is at least trying. At work, they finally got around to providing Windows 7, and it is much better than XP, but my company has an entire department dedicated to packaging windows for us so that it just works. Every once in a while Microsoft comes together, gets lucky, and provides a nice experience. C#/Visual Studio is quite nice, and the Windows Active Directory authentication model is very good. Excel is the market leader in spreadsheets because it's good (of course it was an acquisition from way back when). But it's not consistent across the whole experience; therefore, it isn't particularly tasteful. And more on the subject of taste, I think that's why people still buy manual focus Leicas in 2013 - Taste. It's why I switched from a Bessa R4A to an M6 (which was a stepping stone to R8, R3, SL, M8 ... oops). Spec-wise, M6/R4A exactly the same (R4A even has aperture-priority). But use them for a while, and it's obvious the M6 designers had superior taste. Taste just costs more; it's a fact of life. A lot of people don't get the concept of taste, but if they did, it wouldn't be taste. Oh well. (about SSD - Most modern SSDs are supposed to have very long lives, beyond most normal drive life, so I don't think you have to worry so much about it being written too much (maybe if you use it for PS scratch?). What I found when investigating putting an SSD in my aging Mac Pro is that you have to buy the very expensive ones in order to get decent write speeds. So, reading is fast, writing is about on par with a normal HDD. Overall they probably feel way faster though, since normal desktop use is overwhelmingly more reading than writing from disk, and either way they aren't any slower at writing. Anyhow, probably a major reason my 11" Air is faster than the giant older Mac Pro.)
  14. I have an R8 (knock on wood, metering is fine so far) and a SL, which is great too. However, SL's have their own issues, like trying to find a good one that doesn't have a yellow/dark/separating/de-silvered viewfinder prism, which is also an expensive fix. The SL also, unless you have it modified, only takes those Wein cell batteries at this point, which are $5 a piece and once exposed to air go bad in a month or two, which means you always have to have a spare with you or risk it randomly not being there. Thank God my iPhone lightmeter is pretty accurate Why can't Leica be like Linhof and just make the same exact awesome thing for 50+ years? If they were making the SL today (like they make the MP to be a sorta-M3), I would be saving up for one.
×
×
  • Create New...