first leica

[flavio81]

The entrance and exit pupils of the symmetrical lenses for RF cameras are about the same size - hence no distortion @ any ƒ/stop and focus distance.
With asymmetrical wides for SLR (or RF), the pupils are of different size - hence the distortion with variable form, tied to focus distance etc. etc.

In case some magazines in the 1960's said otherwise because their advertisers asked - it's a free world that runs on money.

No... I own the above lens (the retrofocus, SLR one) and it is indeed free from distortion and sharp to the edges, for all practical purposes and practical shooting distances. Not theory but actual, usable results.

The world has moved to SLR long, long ago. I understand there rangefinders can have their advantages, but "distortion free wide angles" are not a rangefinder-exclusivity anymore.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The entrance and exit pupils of the symmetrical lenses for RF cameras are about the same size - hence no distortion @ any ƒ/stop and focus distance.
With asymmetrical wides for SLR (or RF), the pupils are of different size - hence the distortion with variable form, tied to focus distance etc. etc.

In case some magazines in the 1960's said otherwise because their advertisers asked - it's a free world that runs on money.

No... I own the above lens (the retrofocus, SLR one) and it is indeed free from distortion and sharp to the edges, for all practical purposes and practical shooting distances. Not theory but actual, usable results.

The world has moved to SLR long, long ago. I understand there rangefinders can have their advantages, but "distortion free wide angles" are not a rangefinder-exclusivity anymore.

The Hasselblad 903 SWC is rectilinearly correct and it is not a range finder nor nor an SLR, but it is a MF camera.

 

[georg16nik]

The Hasselblad 903 SWC is rectilinearly correct and it is not a range finder nor nor an SLR, but it is a MF camera.

Biogon. Inspired from...

In 1946 the first patent for a new kind of symmetrical wide-angle lens was applied for by the Russian lens designer Michail Roossinov. It looked as if two retrofocus lenses had been combined with the rear elements together and thus had a symmetrical arrangement of positive refractive powers close to the aperture, surrounded at the front and back by strongly negative menisci.
As of 1951, Ludwig Bertele carried this idea further and designed the legendary Biogon on behalf of Zeiss...

by H. H. Nasse
Carl Zeiss AG
Camera Lens Division
Dezember 2011

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Regading rangefinders, my favorite one is the Kodak Retina IIIc. I love that camera!

Interesting. After reading Stephen Gandy's review of it and the IIa, I chose the IIa -- I like its big shutter housing.

https://www.cameraquest.com/ret3c.htm

https://www.cameraquest.com/retIIa.htm

 

[ColColt]

There was a camera(s) that looked much like that but had a bellow. Which one was that? I saw a picture of Margaret Bourke-White with one, a rarity as she preferred larger format.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

After getting Leica M film camera I would not take any other RF, not just for free, but even if I paid to use it. Waste of my photography time.

 

[bo eder]

After getting Leica M film camera I would not take any other RF, not just for free, but even if I paid to use it. Waste of my photography time.

This sounds like a very satisfied Leica customer right here! Don't waste his time!

 

[Jim Jones]

After getting Leica M film camera I would not take any other RF, not just for free, but even if I paid to use it. Waste of my photography time.

A Retina in the pocket beats my M4 left at home.

 

[blindpig]

+1,Jim

 

[Sirius Glass]

My "best photographs" are the ones that are on the undeveloped film and the ones that I never took.

 

[ColColt]

The shots I've missed could have been Pulitzer Prize winners but, I'll never know.

 

[seanE]

Do you guys have any experience with screw mount lenses? i see you can get nice focal lengths and F numbers quite cheaply on the ebay, and how important is sharpness? i know that sound dumb, but how much detail can say tri-x 400 resolve, id be planing on using a fast noisy film elusively.

 

[darkosaric]

Do you guys have any experience with screw mount lenses? i see you can get nice focal lengths and F numbers quite cheaply on the ebay, and how important is sharpness? i know that sound dumb, but how much detail can say tri-x 400 resolve, id be planing on using a fast noisy film elusively.

LTM Leicas are awesome, cheap old elmar 5cm f3,5 is a great lens. Look here:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Do you guys have any experience with screw mount lenses? i see you can get nice focal lengths and F numbers quite cheaply on the ebay, and how important is sharpness? i know that sound dumb, but how much detail can say tri-x 400 resolve, id be planing on using a fast noisy film elusively.

Where are four large groups for LTM lenses:

Old Leica, mostly 50mm, plus Summars 35 3.5 and Elmar 90 f4. All are pleasing, low contrast, classic Leitz rendering. Main and common problem - quality of glass. Doesn't coop with time.

FSU - mostly for 50mm, plus 35mm Jupiter 12 and 28mm Orion 15 for common used. In opposite to old Leitz glass those have clean and more less durable optics. But mechanically they aren't even close to old Leitz.
All are aluminum with very tiny screws to hold parts together. If you are handy FSU 50mm primes once collimated (shimmed) will give results surpassing old Leitz 50mm LTMs. Those are also most cheapest one in cost.

Old made in Japan LTM. Big selection. Good results. Might have similar problems with glass as old Leitz, but seems to be less in average.

Cosina made LTM lenses. Those are new, modern and plenty. Focal length easily to get are 50, 35 and wider with matching VFs. Next to issues free in handling, but some lenses might need thread lock to be applied after extensive use. Most of Cosina LTM glass is very contrasty. But kind of flat in terms of rendering.

All of these lenses will give enough sharpness on 8x10, if not larger prints. I have most of my experience with bw, color bring different aspects. LTM Cosina made will give most predictable and well saturated, correctly balanced results, because they are modern lenses.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

A Retina in the pocket beats my M4 left at home.

In the pocket? No doubt. For in the pocket I used to have XA, BTW.

But I'm not into the cameras for pockets for now.
If I'm on the walk I wear the camera. And nothing beats film M with tabbed Leica lens on it for fast fiddling.
By the time you'll set Retina, I'll be done and gone with M and using of only one hand

 

[seanE]

thanks guys, how do the preform on m mount cameras, are there good and bad adopters,

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Most will fit alright on M adapter. Some will have focus tab between RF windows on close focus distance. Some will not work with M adapters at all (I have seen only one so far).
I never used Leica, Cosina made M adapters, but cheap from e-bay. It works fine, but maybe this is why some of the old LTM lenses didn't.
LTM version of same lens usually have 1m or so for minimal focus distance. M version will let you get closer.

 

[seanE]

I'm after getting distracted by some leica m4/4-2/4-p. If you were to pick one leica for life under the 6/700 mark, What would it be? I read that the m4s can't be adjusted, And what they go out of wack you need a new part, but I've also read that the steel parts are sturdier, which last the longest after a CLA?
also whats with ''simplifying the range finder'' can i still nail focus with a f1.1 50mm?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm after getting distracted by some leica m4/4-2/4-p. If you were to pick one leica for life under the 6/700 mark, What would it be? I read that the m4s can't be adjusted, And what they go out of wack you need a new part, but I've also read that the steel parts are sturdier, which last the longest after a CLA?
also whats with ''simplifying the range finder'' can i still nail focus with a f1.1 50mm?

Do not take serious this BS about steel parts. German are build differently from Canadian, different manufacturing methods to make it more cost effective with some slight modifications of materials which in real photography are irrelevant.
But all three cameras you have mentioned are very different. M4 is classic, as classic as it could be but without limitations of M2/M3. M4-2 is something special, it doesn't feel old as German M4,3,2, but it feels like simple and perfect tool if you like it in black. M4-P is more fancy one, very different from M4 and M4-2.
I have M4-2 and it is the camera I trust after it was taken to -28 +40 Celsius for hours, days and months. They are less expensive because many buying Leica with huge snobbery factor and limited photography skills.

Of course, 1.1 is not the problem of RF focusing if camera is in working order. As you might know it is limit of the DOF and recomposing after focusing and focus shift which comes with fast lenses as well.

 

[flavio81]

In the pocket? No doubt. For in the pocket I used to have XA, BTW.

Retina for the win. The Retina IIIc has an excellent f2.0 lens, 50mm instead of that wide thing, more precise rangefinder, full manual control, and more beauty and smoothness.

 

[blockend]

I'm after getting distracted by some leica m4/4-2/4-p. If you were to pick one leica for life under the 6/700 mark, What would it be? I read that the m4s can't be adjusted, And what they go out of wack you need a new part, but I've also read that the steel parts are sturdier, which last the longest after a CLA?
also whats with ''simplifying the range finder'' can i still nail focus with a f1.1 50mm?

Some people swear the only authentic Leica experience is a Barnack with a 50. Others say it's a double stroke M3 and yet more say it's the Leica lenses that make the brand what it is and everything else is a half-measure. Really, it's what you make it. Unless you're buying from a dealer with a returns policy, it makes sense to put a pot of money aside for a CLA. Rangefinders go out of line, curtains get holed, shutters cap, it's what happens to decades old cameras and if you're not technical the fixes cost £$£$.

Ask yourself why you want a Leica. If it's the optical quality it'll be expensive, more so if you want a variety of lenses. If it's the quality of the engineering and the rangefinder experience, you can pick up a user M from about £400, maybe less. Truth be told a Leica is a pretty specialised tool for anyone coming from an SLR, and most effective close to the 50mm norm. I wouldn't be without mine, but I wouldn't have one as my only film camera.

 

[Jim Jones]

Retina for the win. The Retina IIIc has an excellent f2.0 lens, 50mm instead of that wide thing, more precise rangefinder, full manual control, and more beauty and smoothness.

The Retina IIIc does have a nice lens and is a great pocket camera, but it certainly does not have the build quality of a Leica. If it is handled carefully, it should produce good photos for many years. It does have some delicate parts. In comparison, my M4 has over 40 years of hard use with no problems at all.

 

[ColColt]

About eight months ago I bought an excellent M2 that had been CLA'd by DAG three years prior and was shown the receipt by the seller. It had his familiar "92" where normally you'd see the "L" when you take the chrome screw out. It was super fine except it was a tad out of alignment.

I talked with Youxin Ye about it and he told me to buy some better screwdrivers than the ones I spoke with him about and got some with a 2mm tip, the size needed to make the adjustment. After doing that it's been perfect and I can';t think of a better Leica, at least for me, in that it has lines for the 35, 50 and 90mm lens...all I'd ever use...wonderful camera.

 

[macfred]

Instead, consider a Canon 7; you can use Leica screw-mount lenses with that.

https://www.cameraquest.com/canon7sz.htm

+1 !
--
Another option is the Canon P for LTM lenses - cheap and cheerfull and a feast for my eyes ...

Stephen Gandy prefers the black version ( a little more pricey) ...
https://www.cameraquest.com/canonp.htm

I really like the silver one ...
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/CanonP.html

 

[seanE]

Can you adjust the range finder yourself in an m4/m4-2? And are they completely different cameras, Or just made in Canada.
Heres what I've been looking at...

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/Leica-M2-Gehause-1108788-/182001802020?hash=item2a60271b24:g:GM8AAOSwMmBVydDD
http://www.ebay.ie/itm/Leica-M4-Gehause-1191002-/172078083552?hash=item2810a72de0:g:FPAAAOSwhkRWcYqe
http://www.ebay.ie/itm/Leica-M4-2-3...841767?hash=item1eaa756f27:g:gUwAAOSwa-dWo4MX