Jump to content

norm_snyder

Members
  • Content Count

    436
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About norm_snyder

  • Rank
    Erfahrener Benutzer

Profile Information

  • Country
    USA

Converted

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I have, and continue to use, the 21mm f2.8 Zeiss Biogon on my M10 and M246 Monochrome. I had used it previously on the M9. Sharp, contrasty, no color cast or red edges. Much better than the 21mm f4 Skopar I had owned some time ago. I have previously owneed the 21mm f2.8 Elmarit pre-Asph, as well as the Aspheric version of the Elmarit and much prefer the Zeiss. It’s smaller, sharper in the corners. I don’t find it large or heavy and it’s part of a three lens kit along with 35 and 75mm Summicron. It can be had used for as little as $800 US, and I see no reason to “upgrade” to something el
  2. I love the 35 f2 v4 size, not to mention the way it images, and that's why I've stuck with it through various film and digital bodies. But then, I'm a sucker for Mändler designed lenses. While I have a couple of newer, Karbe designed lenses, it's those lenses from the 60s and 70s to which I keep returning. I'm sorry I never bought a 35mm f1.4 Summilux pre-ASPH when they were cheap[er].
  3. Thank you for this, LCT. I’ve been considering this lens for my CL, in part because I can use the additional f-stop over the 35mm v4 Summicron I’ve been using since some time in the 80s. I had considered the C-V 35mm f1.2, either v2 or v3, but used to own the v1 version to use on an M9, and eventually got rid of it, due to the additional size and weight, not to mention that it’s only a half stop faster. I thought the crop factor might take care of the concerns about corner sharpness and give me a fast “normal” for the CL.
  4. I can highly recommend the Thumbie, originally designed for the M240 and used by me on my M10 for a couple of years with no problem. I got it so that I could use the Visoflex 020 with some adapted lenses (some R mount, a couple of Nikon AIs) and still have the thumb grip. Absolutely no problems!
  5. I am still enthusiastic about using the BEOON after several years, beginning with my M9 [you would need the chimney magnifier attachment that was part of the set originally to use with a camera without live-view], and now with my M10. It really is useful and easy with the M10, using the live view and magnification available. I also have the Visoflex 020 EVF, and this allows me to do this while seated, since the finder tilts, and with the camera mounted on the BEOON, I no longer have to get up to peer down at the display on the camera's back. Recently, I haven't bothered with a cable release
  6. It doesn't appear that the firmware will allow any options beyond changing the first letter of the file name, e.g. Xnnnnnnn, for example. It will allow, once that file name has been used for 9999 shots, for it to be changed, for example, to XAnnnnnnn, XBnnnnnnn [for the next 10,000], etc. although this has to be done manually. In contrast, the m8, M9 and MM would allow me to change the numbering [for example X8nnnnnnn for one body, X9nnnnnnn for a second body, and would continue to number, in sequence. I realize that the EXIF data contains the date the file was created, but it would be muc
  7. I just passed 10,000 shots on my M10 and, as with others' experience, it created a new file folder: Leica101. However, the file numbering reverted to the previous L1000001, ...002, ...003, etc. Moreover, on my next SD card used, formatted in the camera, it continued to write to Leica 101 folder, but now has reverted to writing files with numbers in the 9700 range! With my MM and M9, I was able to renumber files and that sequencing would continue in camera, thereafter. I am unclear whether the fix in the original post above does anything. Is there anything new on this subject?
  8. Thanks, to all for the response, as I'd been concerned that this was a camera malfunction, rather than firmware. It's interesting that it appears to relate to focusing, although as the sensor (as with raw files) remains the same, even with monochrome settings for jpegs, I can't see why it would matter to focusing. Still, it's good to know this isn't an anomaly limited to my Q, alone. I will still go ahead an report it as a possible bug to Leica.
  9. After not having shot with a Q for a couple of years, I picked one up as an autofocus complement to the M10. When shooting with AF Mode set to focus tracking, jpeg saturation set to monochrome to get black and while finder image, upon half press, finder image switches to color until shutter is released, which is distracting. This happens in either AFs or AFc. It does not happen with single point, face recognition or multipoint focus settings, only focus tracking. Has anyone else encountered this?
  10. I have been using the MM1 as well as the M10 for about a year, now, having previously been using a pair of MM1s and selling one, to help finance the purchase of the M10. I originally thought I would end up selling the second Monochrom and getting a second M10, but have not been able to consider it, mainly because the files from the former still look better to me than converted color files from the latter. The color camera has the obvious advantage of it's color files, for some, but I am almost exclusively a black and white shooter and have been for many years. It does have a much bett
  11. I originally bought the 75mm Summicron for use on an M8, and it has continued to be a much used lens. I also own a 75mm f2.5 Color Heliar, and that lens is actually a better complement to my 35mm v4 Summicron and 21mm Super Angulon. That said, the Summicron APO continues to be a great lens that I keep, still use on the M10, although it has needed recalibration of focus a couple of times over the past few years. I got rid of a 75mm Summilux, because I found it heavy, and harder to consistently hit focus. A lot of the musician/club photographs on my site have been with the Summicron over th
  12. Enjoying looking at some terrific work. My site is in my signature. Everything, save the scanned film, with M8, M9, MM and now M10. The film work is mostly M6.
  13. I don't know whether anyone else might have encountered this or not, but my 75mm Apo-Summicron M is appearing in my EXIF data as "75mm f/511"--anyone else run into a problem like this? I know what lens it is, but I seem to others' reports of odd f-numbers being assigned to some other lenses.
  14. Thanks, Mark— While I will certainly pass on one of his bags (frumpy, beat up 15 year old Domke works fine for me), the shade should suit. Cheers, Norm
  15. Resurrecting an old thread. Has anyone used the 46mm Overgaard hood on a 28mm Summicron-M? Does it vignette? Thanks, in advance.
×
×
  • Create New...