Leica holy cow!

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Roxy Durban, Dec 21, 2004.

  1. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    I got my first set of photos taken with my Leica R4, 35mm Elmarit R and
    180mm APO-Telyt-R back from the lab today. Wow!

    Unfortunately I can't post any pictures - I did ask them to make me a low
    res CD of the roll for web use, but it being Xmas they just didn't have
    the time at the lab.

    I used the camera and 35mm lens in a variety of lighting situations and
    whilst the film was consumer grade Fuji Superia 200, I got the best
    results in daylight. The low light shots seemed a little desaturated, but
    I think that has more to do with the lab being swamped than anything to do
    with the camera equipment used.

    On the whole images are very sharp, even those shot at wide apertures,
    plus the bokeh on both lenses is creamy and pleasing to the eye.

    Unfortunately some of the foam seal around the film window got stuck to
    the roll of film when I took it out this morning, so I will have to get
    that repaired. What remains is gooey and will probably come off next time
    I shoot a roll. I have read that this is a common issue with the R4. Would
    it be safe to shoot a roll with the foam off?

    I really like this little camera and I will take it with me whenever I go
    out in future. It's small, easy to use and the results are great. Now,
    what do I sell to get my next Leica lens, and what lens should that be???
    I have seen a 90mm (Summicron?) at a used equipment store recently, but it
    is hellishly expensive (close to US$1,000).
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. You can get the 90mm Summicron-R for about $400-500 used

    The 28mm Elmarit-R and 50mm Summilux-R are nice to round out such a
    system, and they go for $700 on up, used.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. (Roxy Durban) wrote:
    I have seen a 90mm (Summicron?) at a used equipment store recently, but
    it is hellishly expensive (close to US$1,000).
    ===============================

    Wasn't you complaining that Canon gear was expensive a few days ago. Now
    sell all your Nikon gear and tell us how lousy it is. :)



    Cody,

    http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks
     
    AnOvercomer 02, Dec 21, 2004
    #3
  4. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    Ooh...look!

    Unabashed jealousy! ;-)
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 22, 2004
    #4
  5. AnOvercomer 02, Dec 22, 2004
    #5
  6. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    What on earth for? That would be like taking a giant leap backwards
    (unless you have a bunch of superb Minolta lenses in your bag).

    BTW, I got my Leica stuff for next to nothing.
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 22, 2004
    #6
  7. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    Something I don't like about the R lenses I own is the long throw to get
    them in focus. This is especially so with the 180mm which rotates nearly
    270 degrees from infinity to the closest distance and while it is a very
    nicely damped lens, I find it a bit difficult to get into focus quickly
    (unlike my MF Nikkors which I can focus really quickly). Are all the R
    lenses like this?
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 22, 2004
    #7
  8. Which 180?
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 22, 2004
    #8
  9. AnOvercomer 02 wrote:
    No jealousy here Roxy, I have no desire to pay Leica prices. I am happy
    with Canon, although I am still thinking about that Maxxum 7D.

    (Roxy Durban) wrote:
    What on earth for? That would be like taking a giant leap backwards
    (unless you have a bunch of superb Minolta lenses in your bag).
    ===============================

    What's wrong with Minolta? They have good camera bodies and seem to have
    a pretty decent lens lineup. I like the 7D because it has AS. I don't
    have a whole lot of money invested in Canon gear and no IS lenses, so I
    wouldn't lose much by switching. It would be nice to have AS working for
    all lenses.


    (Roxy Durban) wrote:
    BTW, I got my Leica stuff for next to nothing.
    ============================

    Sounds like a dandy deal, but I suspect it to be a rare occurrence.

    BTW, is that VR lens you got working as well as an IS lens?
    8)-(--(




    Cody,

    http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks
     
    AnOvercomer 02, Dec 22, 2004
    #9
  10. Who would want to talk to a moron like you anyway?

    Asshole!
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 22, 2004
    #10
  11. Roxy Durban

    McLeod Guest

    Oh, look, the only person willing to carry on a conversation with you
    now is Scarpitti!
     
    McLeod, Dec 22, 2004
    #11
  12. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    APO-Telyt-R f/3.4
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 23, 2004
    #12
  13. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    Nothing wrong with Minolta. I've never used one, but I thought you were
    invested in Canon, so I couldn't understand why you would want to do that.

    From what I understand, Minolta aren't really offering a professional
    system, plus Alan says that he battled to get the lenses he has, so I
    would steer clear of them.
    It was. There's no ways I would have spent $4k for two used lenses and a
    20-year-old body, but after seeing the results, I am looking for ways of
    expanding the lens collection with more used stuff.
    Ha! That 70-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor VR lens is the best thing I have ever
    owned. I go so far as to say that it exceeds all the Canon lenses I ever
    used, with the exception (maybe) of the 400mm f/2.8L. It is definitely
    better than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (waits for the sound of angry
    Canon users).
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 23, 2004
    #13
  14. Roxy Durban

    Annika1980 Guest

    From: Roxy Durban
    Leica = General Motors
    M-Series = Cadillac
    R-Series = Cavalier

    Figured you'd go for the junk. LOL!
     
    Annika1980, Dec 23, 2004
    #14
  15. In a fit of stupidity, Annika 1980 wrote:

    "Leica = General Motors
    M-Series = Cadillac
    R-Series = Cavalier

    Figured you'd go for the junk. LOL!"
    For which he deserves the epithet: Moron!
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 23, 2004
    #15
  16. (Roxy Durban) wrote:
    Ha! That 70-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor VR lens is the best thing I have ever
    owned. I go so far as to say that it exceeds all the Canon lenses I ever
    used, with the exception (maybe) of the 400mm f/2.8L. It is definitely
    better than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (waits for the sound of angry
    Canon users).
    ============================

    Have you ever used the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS or any IS lens or are you just
    saying that because it's a Canon lens (suppressing anger)?




    Cody,

    http://community-2.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/PhotographyLinks
     
    AnOvercomer 02, Dec 23, 2004
    #16
  17. Roxy Durban

    Bandicoot Guest

    Is it just me, or do we all feel that calling someone a moron in a sentence
    that contains a spelling mistake is a little self defeating?


    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Dec 24, 2004
    #17
  18. I don't have time always to check spelling. My aploligees.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 24, 2004
    #18
  19. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    Well considering I don't know where a Cadillac or Cavalier would slot in
    w.r.t. motoring classes, I guess your joke fell short somewhere in the
    Atlantic.
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 24, 2004
    #19
  20. Roxy Durban

    Roxy Durban Guest

    I have used the following Canon IS lenses:

    75-300mm
    28-135mm*
    70-200mm
    100-400mm*
    300mm f/2.8L
    400mm f/2.8L

    * These two I owned for a while.

    I was only joking about the Nikkor being better than its Canon
    counterpart. The Canon is also a very, very good lens. If I could have
    afforded one I would have probably stuck with Canon and eventually gotten
    the 24-70mm f/2.8L and 16-35mm f/2.8L.

    As things turned out, I just got a much better deal on some choice Nikon
    gear, including the 70-200mm f/2.8G EDIF VR AF-S. It's the best zoom lens
    I have ever owned. I do think it has better bokeh than the Canon though.
     
    Roxy Durban, Dec 24, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.