[LRflex] Re: R vs. M - was Newbie Introduction
- From: Richard Ward <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:57:56 -0700 (PDT)
Hello Rob,
I can't comment at all on how R glass stacks up to M because I've never held
any let alone shot with it. I DID read the first 'section' of Edwin Puts Leica
Compendium in tota just last night. I was a bit startled to find out that at a
fairly recent point in time (late 90's? iirc) the M lenses and the R lenses (at
the points of overlap) were quite alike in design and optical character. So,
depending upon which lenses and the caveats for which era, the R's and M's
should be in 'equivalent' output neighborhoods. I'd only heard the mystique
about magical M's for so long, I didn't even flippin know there were SLR's made
by Leica! :-) I only really stumbled upon them from having used an 'adapted'
M42 Zeiss Pancolar Fifty on my film eos and then searching the internet for
more adapters and lenses to try. Low and Behold, I could shoot with the
legendary Summicrons, Summiluxes, and Elmarits, for a fraction of the price
just by going the SLR route - an economic
and photographic no brainer to me! I do plan to give RF photography a go with
a used M8/8.2 at some point, but that's partly because of being able to shoot
IR photo's with it!
As far as I'm concerned my 90 Elmarit f2.8 (ver.ii) is a Stunner.
I shoot with, like you, a 50 Summicron. It's Great. Unequivocably.
The 90 elmarit is better.
If it's a focal length you like, don't think you could go wrong considering
it's current ebay price point.
Richard in Michigan
________________________________
There are 10 kinds of people in the world - those who understand binary and
those who don't!
_________
Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else.
- James M. Barrie
________________________________
________________________________
From: Robert Lilley <speyerdom@xxxxxxx>
To: leicaReflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, March 31, 2010 2:38:10 PM
Subject: [LRflex] R vs. M - was Newbie Introduction
Thank you all for such a rousing welcome! The predominate phrase I hit upon
was "lovers of Leica glass". This is why I purchased an R4 rather than a
Nikon, etc. My best pictures were always with a Summicron or Summitar lens -
even the old uncoated 3.5 50cm Elmar on my old Leica IID gave consistently good
results. But I just gotta beg the question - are the R lenses as good as the
M lenses? Somehow I feel this question must come up a lot and apologize in
advance if this has been answered in three part harmony in some archive. I
imagine it is much like the Planar vs Xenotar debate amongst the Rollei crowd.
Good to know too that the R glass is able to migrate into the zeros and ones
world.
Rob
Belvidere, New Jersey
USA
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
