philipus Posted September 21, 2011 Share #1 Â Posted September 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) This might be a bit of an odd question. Â I'm considering a 5cm Elmar LTM for use on my Leica II and my M3. Â Has anyone experienced that the f2.8's minimum aperture of 16 makes that lens less useful than the f3.5 which has f22? Â I've read the threads on the Elmars found in the Wiki but haven't found the answer to this question. Â Cheerio Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 Hi philipus, Take a look here 5cm Elmar minimum aperture question: f16 vs f22. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gyoung Posted September 21, 2011 Share #2 Â Posted September 21, 2011 I have both lenses, but have never used a lens on a 35mm camera at such a small aperture, even a macro lens. Its a lng way down for even an f/3.5 lens and difraction will have started to kick in. Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2011 Share #3 Â Posted September 21, 2011 The minimum aperture is rather irrelevant. One only uses it when it is absolutely necessary . I cannot recall a single instance. Somebody will come up with proof to the contrary, I feel, but nevertheless small formats and small apertures are not a happy marriage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 21, 2011 Share #4 Â Posted September 21, 2011 Fast film, bright sunlight, white sand, and the Leica II's 1/500 sec: you might need f/22 if you left the yellow filter at home. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share #5  Posted September 21, 2011 Fast film, bright sunlight, white sand, and the Leica II's 1/500 sec: you might need f/22 if you left the yellow filter at home.  Well yes, this is what I was thinking about  Plus in the past on my Canon equipment I've often used the smaller apertures for landscape photography for instance.  It is interesting to hear the differing views Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 21, 2011 Share #6 Â Posted September 21, 2011 IMHO the 3.5 is a better lens anyway (red scale early design or the later style which also comes in LTM mount). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 21, 2011 Share #7 Â Posted September 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I agree that a Red scale 3,5 is probably the best Elmar classic (the "new" 2,8 is another thing) ; f22 vs. f16 I think is valued mainly in macro usage... generally speaking, top closing isn't a "fashionable" content (years and years ago, to make something "different" a Japanese lensmaker made a universal 135 for SLRs with top closing at f/64... a commercial flop - despite the blinking to the legendary "f64 group") Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.