sml_photo Posted November 5, 2015 Author Share #81 Posted November 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I hear one calling your name in the distance. Seriously though, I wouldn't be without it. I soot a lot of Architecture and buildings and it is invaluable. A gorgeous little lens. I'm not saying no...I've put my foot in my mouth more times than I can count! In the meantime, I'm absolutely looking forward to the 24. 24 and 50 are my two most used focal lengths with my DSLR. Nice to have Leica glass with those perspectives! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 Hi sml_photo, Take a look here 24mm lens without an EVF or Finder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jdlaing Posted November 5, 2015 Share #82 Posted November 5, 2015 I'm not saying no...I've put my foot in my mouth more times than I can count! In the meantime, I'm absolutely looking forward to the 24. 24 and 50 are my two most used focal lengths with my DSLR. Nice to have Leica glass with those perspectives! For me now it is 24 and 35. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsolomon Posted November 7, 2015 Share #83 Posted November 7, 2015 WooHoo. Ordered the 24mm Elmar today. Enjoy it and keep us posted ! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 7, 2015 Share #84 Posted November 7, 2015 WooHoo. Ordered the 24mm Elmar today. The comments and observations on this page (and others) really helped me make the decision. Appreciated....and entertaining. Now I'd better like it or it's your fault!! thx. Enjoy it, use it with all your heart. The Elmar-M is an excellent performer, my choice too. I use it either with the EVF for precise framing and focusing, or with the standard finder (most of the time). You get used to what it sees over time and with experience, just like working with a Hasselblad SWC ... Or most cameras' optical finders, really. Most SLR finders show between 92-96% coverage, not 100% unless you have a pro-grade model. Bright line finders rarely frame that accurately. G 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted November 7, 2015 Share #85 Posted November 7, 2015 My ZM 25 brought up the 35/135 framelines, so I changed the lens mount for one that brings up the 28/85 lines provided free from Zeiss. Not sure about the Leica though. I have both the evf and an external ovf, but never use them. I mostly frame with the camera viewfinder, and for critical work, just use the rear lcd. I find that my accuracy with the camera ovf is very high. Just add 10% to whatever you can see in the frame 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 7, 2015 Author Share #86 Posted November 7, 2015 Enjoy it and keep us posted ! I will. Looking forward to getting this lens. I know it is the right decision. I just have to keep using my other two lenses!!! Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 7, 2015 Author Share #87 Posted November 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Enjoy it, use it with all your heart. The Elmar-M is an excellent performer, my choice too. I use it either with the EVF for precise framing and focusing, or with the standard finder (most of the time). You get used to what it sees over time and with experience, just like working with a Hasselblad SWC ... Or most cameras' optical finders, really. Most SLR finders show between 92-96% coverage, not 100% unless you have a pro-grade model. Bright line finders rarely frame that accurately. G I'm going to start out without an external finder and see (literally!) how that works. It would be nice if I could get used to it that way and avoid the need for the EVF2 or Brightline. We'll see... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 7, 2015 Author Share #88 Posted November 7, 2015 I have both the evf and an external ovf, but never use them. I mostly frame with the camera viewfinder, and for critical work, just use the rear lcd. I find that my accuracy with the camera ovf is very high. Just add 10% to whatever you can see in the frame Thanks for the tip! And advice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MT0227 Posted November 9, 2015 Share #89 Posted November 9, 2015 I use it either with the EVF for precise framing and focusing....You get used to what it sees over time and with experience, just like working with a Hasselblad SWC ... Or most cameras' optical finders, really. Most SLR finders show between 92-96% coverage, not 100% unless you have a pro-grade model. I went to B&H this past Friday to try the 21SEM and EVF2 combo on my M-P240. When composing via the OVF and EVF, I found the latter easier but not really displaying that much more than what I saw via the OVF. I'm right eye dominate and shoot with both eyes open. I'd say the above statement is accurate and consistent to what I expect. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted November 9, 2015 Share #90 Posted November 9, 2015 I'm going to start out without an external finder and see (literally!) how that works. It would be nice if I could get used to it that way and avoid the need for the EVF2 or Brightline. We'll see... You should be fine without it. Try framing something at about a hundred yards away and then at 50 feet and look at both on the computer to help you judge the limits. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share #91 Posted November 9, 2015 I went to B&H this past Friday to try the 21SEM and EVF2 combo on my M-P240. When composing via the OVF and EVF, I found the latter easier but not really displaying that much more than what I saw via the OVF. I'm right eye dominate and shoot with both eyes open. I'd say the above statement is accurate and consistent to what I expect. Thanks for passing along the results of this "experiment!" Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share #92 Posted November 9, 2015 You should be fine without it. Try framing something at about a hundred yards away and then at 50 feet and look at both on the computer to help you judge the limits. I'm expecting the lens to arrive this week. I'm gonna try that. Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted November 9, 2015 Share #93 Posted November 9, 2015 I'm expecting the lens to arrive this week. I'm gonna try that. Thanks. If you can pick something in the viewfinder that you want at the far left and right edges of the frame and they are roughly where you want them in the image at bot distances it helps with shots in the future. The nice thing about 24 megapixel raw images is if the image is slightly wider than you need a little judicious crop doesn't cost anything image wise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MT0227 Posted November 10, 2015 Share #94 Posted November 10, 2015 You're welcome, and just to clarify....my experiment was at pretty short distances 50 - 150 ft; but you get the idea. There was some great discussion early on in this thread that talks about just pointing and shooting given the wide angle and DOF; you can zone focus and literally shoot from the hip pretty easily. Thanks for passing along the results of this "experiment!" I went to B&H this past Friday to try the 21SEM and EVF2 combo on my M-P240. When composing via the OVF and EVF, I found the latter easier but not really displaying that much more than what I saw via the OVF. I'm right eye dominate and shoot with both eyes open. I'd say the above statement is accurate and consistent to what I expect. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share #95 Posted November 10, 2015 There was some great discussion early on in this thread that talks about just pointing and shooting given the wide angle and DOF; you can zone focus and literally shoot from the hip pretty easily. Yes, I know. That is not my general practice or inclination. Though, of course, I do resort to that from time to time. Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey James Posted November 10, 2015 Share #96 Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) Makes me think of the F .7 lens that Stanley Kubrick used to shoot some candle-light scenes in Barry Lyndon(1975). Zeiss made ten of the primes, most of them for NASA. Who has the money for a .95 lens? I don't even want to know the price. Or whether it has focus shift. Edited November 10, 2015 by Geoffrey James Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey James Posted November 10, 2015 Share #97 Posted November 10, 2015 B & H has one in stock and it's only Can$15K. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey James Posted November 10, 2015 Share #98 Posted November 10, 2015 WOOPS -- WRONG THREAD -- I was commenting on the new Noctilux. Apologies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sml_photo Posted November 12, 2015 Author Share #99 Posted November 12, 2015 JUST received the lens yesterday. I've only taken a handful of random shots so far. Lookin' good! More later today and tomorrow. But, I am wondering.... I thought I had heard that the 28mm lines would show in the finder, however it's the 35mm lines that I see in my M-P (240) Safari. Is that normal? Is something wrong? (I realized, of course, that there are no lines for the 24mm lens.) Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MT0227 Posted November 12, 2015 Share #100 Posted November 12, 2015 I thought I had heard that the 28mm lines would show in the finder, however it's the 35mm lines that I see in my M-P (240) Safari. Is that normal? With my 21SEM, I see 28+90mm in the RF. You really need to push your M into your face to see it the 28mm border. If you don't, 28mm it's more of less the entire OVF as the frame lines make a border just inside the the most outer edge RF. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.