Skippy Sanchez Posted February 20, 2007 Share #21  Posted February 20, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Skippy: the 15mm f/4.5 is not an M-mount lens, but an M39 screw-mount. Additionally, there is the Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 (M-mount) and the CV 12mm f/5.6 (M39 mount). None of these are rangefinder coupled. I am sure you knew of these and just forgot though  Yeah, I didn't really forget, I just used the wrong terminology. And I hope no one takes my comments wrong -- the CV lenses are great, and a bargain to boot. I was mainly commenting on the speed of the lens, not the quality.  -Skippy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 20, 2007 Posted February 20, 2007 Hi Skippy Sanchez, Take a look here Initial lens selection for my M8, a few questions.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 20, 2007 Share #22 Â Posted February 20, 2007 One more thought: It's really no big deal to unscrew or screw in the magnifier when necessary. I sure like having it when shooting longer than 50mm, but if i need to slap on anything wider, i unmount it & slip it in its cute little handy dandy pouch, conveniently attatched to the strap. It even has a snazzy little lanyard to keep it from falling in the dirt. Sometimes I just let it dangle there if I know I'm going to re-attatch it in soon. Â It's worth the $$. The Japanese ones are cheaper, but either the thread depth is pretty short or the threads are machined differently. I bought a Hong Kong .85 eyepiece to use on my .72 MP finder when shooting wide 'cause I wear specs, but because it doesn't thread all the way into the eyepiece, my eyeball is is even FURTHER away from the finder and makes it a moot point anyway. It would have been less frustraiting to have just used the $$ to light my cigars with. Â I am in the luxurious position of two m8's For the magnifier that is a blessing. 35 and longer - the camera with the magnifier, 28 and shorter- switch bodies. I've removed the lanyard, as I feel (maybe unjustified) that it scuffs the chrome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Sanchez Posted February 20, 2007 Share #23 Â Posted February 20, 2007 I am in the luxurious position of two m8's For the magnifier that is a blessing...... Â yup, that's my plan too. hopefully i'll have two M8s within the next couple weeks; one will be my 'wide' body and one will be for 50mm & up (and i can loose the cute little pouch and lanyard). i'm not concerned about scuff marks, but the bane of my life are camera straps (even though i use them religiously) or anything that can snag or hang up on something. Â I told my wife i think i know how i'll die (now that i'm not riding Harleys anymore): a neck strap will snag on something while i'm climbing on top of something for a better angle and hang me when i fall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 20, 2007 Share #24 Â Posted February 20, 2007 That's a question I ought to have the answer to. Is accurate focus possible with the 50 at 1.4 without using a magnifier? Excuse me if this is stupid question... Â It's not a stupid question and the answer depends, in part, on your eyesight. If your eyesight is excellent, you may do fine working without the magnifier. The magnifier makes it easier to focus accurately. I myself use a 1.25 for 35 mm and longer lenses. Â There are a lot of myths circulating about rangefinder lenses which have little basis in fact or direct experience. For example, when one says that lens A is "better" than lens B, he or she first needs to define what lens qualities are highest priority in that comparison. The cliche is that Leica lenses are best, Zeiss lenses are "almost as good" and the CV lenses are "very good for the money". That isn't always accurate. When one is looking at a specific quality (such as resolution in the outer zones at F/2.8) in actual side by side comparisons, a given lens from *any* of those three manufacturers might show the strongest performance. I say this having tested rangefinder lenses, side by side, fairly intensively for several years now. Â Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share #25  Posted February 21, 2007 I say this having tested rangefinder lenses, side by side, fairly intensively for several years now. Cheers,  I know, I am one of your subscribers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teehas53 Posted February 21, 2007 Share #26 Â Posted February 21, 2007 I'd also like to weigh in here, having used some of the more popular current lenses from the three builders we mostly hear about. None of the lenses I've tried (15mm thru 90mm, with a few head-to-head comparisons) were what you could call lacking in any way. In terms of real-world photography, raw performance is almost a non-issue. It comes down largely to personal taste, budget, and what you might call strategy. Â A person could put together a pretty versatile kit with significantly less initial expense by giving serious consideration to Zeiss & CV. I can't fault any of my Leica glass in any way, but you do pay a hefty premium for those last "few hundredths." Â Photographers interested in having more lens flexibility sooner (without taking out a second mortgage) have some great choices available. Life is good... Â Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 21, 2007 Share #27  Posted February 21, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration)  Photographers interested in having more lens flexibility sooner (without taking out a second mortgage) have some great choices available. Life is good...  Tom  That is the bottom line in my view. One of the great advantages of using an M mount camera is that there are many exceptional lenses available and not all of them are expensive. That can also be true in the SLR world but not to the same degree.  Cheers,  Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 21, 2007 Share #28 Â Posted February 21, 2007 I know, I am one of your subscribers. Â A man of taste <G>. Seriously, though, my hope is that the site will be helpful to people who are trying to make the kinds of decisions you're pondering. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share #29  Posted February 21, 2007 A man of taste <G>. Seriously, though, my hope is that the site will be helpful to people who are trying to make the kinds of decisions you're pondering. Cheers,  Sean  I've done pondered already. My M8 comes on Thursday! Now I just need to know the secret handshake! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJL Posted February 21, 2007 Share #30  Posted February 21, 2007 That is the bottom line in my view. One of the great advantages of using an M mount camera is that there are many exceptional lenses available and not all of them are expensive. That can also be true in the SLR world but not to the same degree. Cheers,  Sean  Sean, I read carefully many of your lens tests as I was starting my M glass collection also. Your candid and practical evaluations did help me think about what I may have wanted to try. My initial intent was to get some less costly CV glass to see what I really liked shooting on the M8, but I have to say, I am not sure I really want to nor need to trade any of it out or up. I grabbed the CV 15/4.5, the 35/1.2 Nokton, and the 50/1.5 Nokton, and so far, I am very pleased with how they draw. I also added a Zeiss 25/2.8 Biogon, which is also quite good for the cost. Have added a Leica 75/2 Apo since, and am now looking to the 90/2 and maybe the Noctilux. A lot of that was made much easier by being able to get and use glass that did not require a second mortgage or more, which I am happy about, as I still need to feed the "L" need for my other shooting.  Leica does make some truly outstanding lenses. CV and Zeiss also make some things that can fill the gaps or provide a great alternative for the lesser used segments.  LJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 21, 2007 Share #31 Â Posted February 21, 2007 Man i'm on a third mortgage, need to catch up LJ. LOL Â I do agree with Sean there is MUCH more M glass out there to choose from than most SLR systems have options for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 21, 2007 Share #32 Â Posted February 21, 2007 Sean, I read carefully many of your lens tests as I was starting my M glass collection also. Your candid and practical evaluations did help me think about what I may have wanted to try. My initial intent was to get some less costly CV glass to see what I really liked shooting on the M8, but I have to say, I am not sure I really want to nor need to trade any of it out or up. I grabbed the CV 15/4.5, the 35/1.2 Nokton, and the 50/1.5 Nokton, and so far, I am very pleased with how they draw. I also added a Zeiss 25/2.8 Biogon, which is also quite good for the cost. Have added a Leica 75/2 Apo since, and am now looking to the 90/2 and maybe the Noctilux. A lot of that was made much easier by being able to get and use glass that did not require a second mortgage or more, which I am happy about, as I still need to feed the "L" need for my other shooting. Â Leica does make some truly outstanding lenses. CV and Zeiss also make some things that can fill the gaps or provide a great alternative for the lesser used segments. Â LJ Â Hi LJ, Â Thanks, glad to hear it. CV and Zeiss also make lenses that are exceptional even without considering cost or even when one is planning on heavy usage. In fact, in some technical respects, some might say (for example) that the Zeiss 25 outperforms the 24 Elmarit Aspherical (although I prefer the latter for its more moderate contrast and competence on center wide open). Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 21, 2007 Share #33 Â Posted February 21, 2007 Man i'm on a third mortgage, need to catch up LJ. LOLÂ I do agree with Sean there is MUCH more M glass out there to choose from than most SLR systems have options for. Â Hi Guy, Â More, at least, with respect to very high quality lenses. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJL Posted February 21, 2007 Share #34  Posted February 21, 2007 Hi LJ, Thanks, glad to hear it. CV and Zeiss also make lenses that are exceptional even without considering cost or even when one is planning on heavy usage. In fact, in some technical respects, some might say (for example) that the Zeiss 25 outperforms the 24 Elmarit Aspherical (although I prefer the latter for its more moderate contrast and competence on center wide open).  Cheers,  Sean  Understood. My only 'gripe" with the Zeiss 25 for me right now is the coding issue and the fact that it brings up the wrong framelines on the M8. (Well, wrong for what it could bring up for easier use.) With my M8 in Solms right now, and still not having a filter for the 25/2.8, I have not had to wrestle with the cyan in the corners yet, but I know that is coming.  LJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 21, 2007 Share #35  Posted February 21, 2007 Understood. My only 'gripe" with the Zeiss 25 for me right now is the coding issue and the fact that it brings up the wrong framelines on the M8. (Well, wrong for what it could bring up for easier use.) With my M8 in Solms right now, and still not having a filter for the 25/2.8, I have not had to wrestle with the cyan in the corners yet, but I know that is coming. LJ  I agree.  Cheers,  Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill vann Posted February 21, 2007 Share #36  Posted February 21, 2007 I find myself quite happy with leica 21 asph and 28-50 tri elmar as a walkabout kit.  Sold my 28 elmarit pre asp, 35 cron, 50 elmar and 90 elmarit replacing them with 2 ultrons, a nokton and apo lanthar respectively. i luckily have a leitz and kobalux adapter (coded) on the 28 and 35.  thinking 75 with my lens discount  i do like the 50mm planar though, reminds me of my early 60s Zeiss pancolar a planar design i believe.  bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.