M-mount, wide frame lines, and TTL metering?

[Tom Hoskinson]

So basically, if I chose to use a 35mm f/1.2 on the R4x, I could think the camera was focused correctly, but I would be out of focus due to the narrow DoF?

Damn me and my love of a total lack of DoF.

If I'm concerned about inadequate DOF in a given composition, I often crank the aperture ring on my 35mm/f1.2 back to f2, f4, f5.6 and/or even f11. Plenty of DOF that way.

 

[AutumnJazz]

I guess I'll be saving my pennies for a used .58 M7, then.

 

[Anupam Basu]

Just wondering why you would avoid the ZI to get an M7. Better built, perhaps and it's a Leica, but ZI is by no means flimsy. The .58 M7 has a 40mm EBL, the ZI has 56. The ZI also has a top shutter speed of 2000 which lets me use the Ultron wide open in daylight. And the ZI viewfinder is simply unmatched. Any particular reason to prefer the Leica?

 

[AutumnJazz]

I'm a consumer, I'm a sucker for brands.

I'm actually going to go to bhphotovideo and try both of them before I make any final decisions, though. The M7 is, however, at the top of my list due to Leica fame. I want a camera that will last for as long as I will.

 

[Anupam Basu]

Ahem! At the risk of being labeled a heretic, I'd suggest that the Leica fame means little nowadays. The longevity associated with the barnacks and the M3, M2 etc doesn't automatically translate to the M7 because of the electronics involved. Remember the classic Leicas were fully mechanical marvels which could be adjusted for years.

 

[AutumnJazz]

And the M7 can't be tuned up like the original M's?

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I'm a consumer, I'm a sucker for brands.

I'm actually going to go to bhphotovideo and try both of them before I make any final decisions, though. The M7 is, however, at the top of my list due to Leica fame. I want a camera that will last for as long as I will.

If you are a sucker for brands - you should be a sucker for Zeiss equipment.

I have several M series Leicas - - they sit unused, locked up in my camera cabinet while I shoot pictures with my Zeiss Ikon and my CV Bessa Ts.

Try renting a Zeiss Ikon (or whatever) and shooting film with it.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

The current price of a Voigtlander Bessa T is $279.00 plus tax and shipping.

http://www.cameraquest.com/VCBT.htm

 

[Anupam Basu]

I wouldn't go so far as to say it can't be tuned up, but it does have a lot of electronics, including the shutter which is battery dependent, so I wouldn't expect them to go as strong in fifty years as the M3s do now. I have nothing against Leica, my M2 was a dream to use. If I could afford a second body I'd keep it, or perhaps get an M4-P which I thought long and hard abut. But the Zeiss seemed such a well designed camera I had to try it. Of course, in a few years I'll know how tough it is, but my initial impression of it is great. Certainly in terms of brand name, if any brand can claim a heritage to match Leica, it is Zeiss - Robert Capa and all that - but I never did care about that.

 

[Nick Merritt]

The Hexar RF has AE and 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 and 135 framelines. I think the Leica M6/M7 with the .58 finder have the same framelines, minus the 135.

 

[AutumnJazz]

So, why do you like your Zeiss so much more than your Leicas? I honestly haven't been able to find a good "review" on either the ZI or the M7.

 

[Anupam Basu]

I mentioned a couple of reasons in post #53, but in brief:

1> Simply the best viewfinder in the business.
2> One of the best RF, with an EBL comparable to the .85 M6/7 models
3> Easy to see 28mm framelines - I have a hard time seeing the 28mm line on the .72 Leicas (should be easier on the .58 models, but your EBL reduces to 40mm)
4> 1/2000 top speed - nice for shooting wide open in daylight
5> AE without costing an arm and a leg (the price of the M7 is a little silly)
6> Easier film loading
7> I like the design of the camera - the bottom rewind and the lighter weight - but that is a subjective call

-A

 

[AutumnJazz]

I wear contacts most of the time, but also glasses. Is the ZI or M7 useable when I'm wearing glasses?

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I wear contacts most of the time, but also glasses. Is the ZI or M7 useable when I'm wearing glasses?

I wear glasses and I always wear them when I use my ZI - with no problems. I have no experience with the M7.

 

[Anupam Basu]

The ZI a lot more usable with glasses for the 28mm frameline than the M4-P or the .72 M6 finder. I believe the M7 has the same finder. No experience with the ,58 finder, but it should make the 28 lines easier to use.

 

[AutumnJazz]

Even more offtopic than my thread has gotten, I'm moving on to lenses. Whether I go with the Zeiss or the Leica, I plan on getting the Cosina-Voigt 35/1.2 with them, and the CV 28/2 later on. How do the CV lenses compare to the Leica and Zeiss lenses? Are the M-mount Zeisses the same as their F-mount ones? I ask because I've seen comparasons of the 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss, Nikon, and Sigma...And I must say the Zeiss was the worst, and the sigma was the best.

In real-world situations, who really is good, and who really is good? Ignoring brands, of course. Cosina makes most of the Zeiss and all of the Voigt lenses, correct? How do they compare? And again, are they as bad as the F-mount lenses?

Pretty much all I do is street photography and landscape, if that matters at all. I am trying to get money together for a LF outfit, too. So for me, this rangefinder outfit is going to be for street (and snapshotty pictures). I'm moving away from my F100 so I can have a smaller, quieter, simpler, less obtrusive, lighter, etc. camera. I really am trying to find the right fit in the camera world for me, and I honestly feel a tiny rangefinder and large format setup is best for me, rather than my current attempt at having a do-it-all camera.

 

[Anupam Basu]

I have pretty much settled on the 4x5 + 35mm combo as well. I have a list of gear on my site, if you are interested. Generally I find CV lenses excellent, but the more important point is that in the quick focus (sometimes zone focus) off the cuff handheld available darkness slow shutter speed world of street shooting what matters is a lens that is good enough. Technique is by far the limiting factor here. I seriously doubt anyone could make out a difference between, say the $350 Ultron 28 and the several thousand worth summicron 28, unless the lenses were carfeully focused and shot on a tripod to bring out the absolute best in them.

 

[AutumnJazz]

I honestly figured as much.

Just a question regarding RF focus. Say I want to focus on something that isn't in the center of the frame, do I simply focus on that (AE lock if I need), then recompose? Or will it end up not being in focus with an insanely wide lens like the 35/1.2 or 50/1?

 

[nsouto]

Just focus on it and recompose. Take the AE-L from another point if that's the case.
I don't have an insanely wide 35 or 50 but the Ultron 35/1.7 rarely if ever gets out of focus this way.
As for durability: my ZI has been used and abused in the last two years and still hasn't missed a beat, at this stage I'd say it's a lasting outfit.

 

[AutumnJazz]

Heh, when I said wide I meant fast. Crazy things go through my fingers at 3am. What you said still applies, though. Good.

Dead Link Removed

That turns me off the M7 even more. :|

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Even more offtopic than my thread has gotten, I'm moving on to lenses. Whether I go with the Zeiss or the Leica, I plan on getting the Cosina-Voigt 35/1.2 with them, and the CV 28/2 later on. How do the CV lenses compare to the Leica and Zeiss lenses? Are the M-mount Zeisses the same as their F-mount ones? I ask because I've seen comparasons of the 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss, Nikon, and Sigma...And I must say the Zeiss was the worst, and the sigma was the best.

In real-world situations, who really is good, and who really is good? Ignoring brands, of course. Cosina makes most of the Zeiss and all of the Voigt lenses, correct? How do they compare? And again, are they as bad as the F-mount lenses?

Pretty much all I do is street photography and landscape, if that matters at all. I am trying to get money together for a LF outfit, too. So for me, this rangefinder outfit is going to be for street (and snapshotty pictures). I'm moving away from my F100 so I can have a smaller, quieter, simpler, less obtrusive, lighter, etc. camera. I really am trying to find the right fit in the camera world for me, and I honestly feel a tiny rangefinder and large format setup is best for me, rather than my current attempt at having a do-it-all camera.

You asked: "How do the CV lenses compare to the Leica and Zeiss lenses?

In my experience the M mount CV lenses are excellent picture takers that compare very favorably with their Zeiss and Leica counterparts.

You also asked: "Are the M-mount Zeiss(sic)lenses the same as their F-mount ones?"

The Zeiss wide angle M mount lenses are not retrofocus designs. The Zeiss wide angle SLR mount lenses are retrofocus designs. That said, in my experience, the performance of both the M mount and SLR mount Zeiss Lenses is outstanding.

The performance of the one SLR Sigma lens (Canon EOS mount) that I own is very good, But it does not equal the performance of my Zeiss lenses of similar focal length.

 

[Markok765]

How about a Konica Hexar RF?

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Zeiss SLR and M mount Rfdr Lens performance.

How about a Konica Hexar RF?

Off topic, Marko.

 

[Markok765]

Off topic, Marko.

The thread title says M-mount, wide frame lines, and TTL.

Konica hexar rf has all of those.

 

[eddym]

I honestly figured as much.

Just a question regarding RF focus. Say I want to focus on something that isn't in the center of the frame, do I simply focus on that (AE lock if I need), then recompose? Or will it end up not being in focus with an insanely wide lens like the 35/1.2 or 50/1?

Well... usually. But it really depends on how close you are to the subject, and how far the focus point is from the centerline after you recompose. Focusing close and shooting wide open, it is possible that the focal plane could fall behind the subject after you recompose, because the focused lens-to-subject distance moves in an arc as you swing the camera.