[LRflex] Re: Update to my Cam & Optical Query Question


On Jul 29, 2009, at 2:42 PM, Richard Ward wrote:


Hi Doug & List,
I am systemically dipping into the Resource a listmember provided (quite generously) and I am catching onto the incredible lack of linkage between a lenses' Optical Formula and how many Cams are or are not hanging off the back of it.
the optics per se have little to do with which body/mount those optics can be stuck to...so cams and the glass are rather independent...
I love many of the old R lenses..but the mount/cams etc must allow these chunks of glass to be adhered to whatever body I may use...
one of my personal favorites is the R 80mm lux 1.4...which is great on many bodies, including various digital bodies I have used it on,
the tricky part is knowing, as some here amazingly know, how those cams etc translate as compatible (or not) with which Leica R 

body,


I always run it by Doug Herr when I am in doubt,


Steve
While not being a universal truism, the # of cams is more important as an advisory of which SLRs the lens will be compatible with and in corrollary an indication of the physical age of the lens itself. The 'gestalt' of designing the lens 'correctly' in the first place of the Leica Realm is so much different than the tailchasing plethora of AF lenses trying to continually be new and different I grew accustomed to over the last decade or two. I'm quite thankful to the inputs people are providing after my postings and questions. They are sincerely appreciated. I would like to note that the way Leica lenses were handling contrast and flare and out of focus transitions & renderings in the images I began encountering while looking for Manual Focus options for my Canon are why I'm looking for those lenses to try, experiment with, and likely fall in love with. 

Richard

________________________________

Life is hard...but I just take it one photograph at a time.
~•~
"You miss 100% of the shots you never take" Wayne Gretzky
~•~
In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows or Gates?
~•~
It's okay to be stupid. Just don't be gung-ho about it.
________________________________


From: "wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 5:25:00 PM
Subject: [LRflex] Re: (LRflex) Shopping Frustration

Richard Ward wrote:

>>>
Is there appreciable optical differences between, for instance, a 1 cam 
Summicron 50 f2 and a late model rom/3cammer of the same lens?
<<<

For the 50 'cron there are some differences, mostly at the widest
apertures. In general it's like asking which is a better flavor, chocolate or strawberry? Other features should be considered too, such as the filter size. The Series VI filters for the early lenses can be difficult to find 
while the 55mm filter size of the later lenses is very common.

One example where I've seen a significant difference is with the 35mm
Elmarit-R (f/2.8).  Even when it was current, Leica only described the
first version (Series VI filters) as a 'good' lens while everything else was described with superlatives. I found that the later versions of this 
lens (Series VII or E55 filters) are significantly better in detail
rendition and flare suppression.
The cam/ROM configuration isn't a reliable guide to the version because 
most older lenses can be retrofitted with additional cams or ROM.

Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web LIVE – Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology -
http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE


------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
  http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
    http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: