DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

User comments btil June 2003

The answer is no

Nice clean image. But it is still a JPEJ file sitting on my comp. screen!!!!!

Send me big fat FB print made on an enlarger with good optics and I'll have a go.

BTW I'm not a true beleiver in the leica lens myth thing. From experience I know both Canon and Nikon have produced some great lenses over the years, and some very ordinary ones, even L series and ED. The chance of landing a "SAD" Leica lens is far less likely. Obsesive quality control in production means less chance of getting a lemon from Solms. And the chances of buying a beutiful set of glass you fall in love with is much more likely.
 
To all Leica cum Nikon users. I have been a Nikon user for some years now and am really tempted to go save up for a Leica M. (M6/M7 or even MP).

Really want to poll from Nikon or even Canon users here. Is Leica M and "lux" and "con" lenses a class above Nikon and Canon.

I don't think I need another camera, Leica for the matter but it's more like I want to have a Leica.

Would greatly appreciate your comments.

Boone Wong
Singapore
 
["Having shot with Nikons for 25 years, I made the move 2 years ago to = purchase an M6TTL and a 35mm Summilux. There is no question about the = incredible sharpness and contrast of this lens IMHO. What I was looking = for was less automation, more control and less girth. I think more when = I shoot with the Leica...sometimes that's good, sometimes that's bad. It = all depends upon what you are trying to do. They are different tools for = different tasks. Would I give up my Nikon tools? No. Would I give up my = Leica tools? No. Would I give up my Hasselblad tools? No. Each has their = place, and each has their strengths and weaknesses. It just depends on = what you're trying to achieve."]
 
Couldn't agree with Barry more.

You have to be a little bit careful when moving from SLR gear, even Leica R or Nikon FM, to a coupled range finder system like the M6. It can be a bit of a culture shock. Also, CRF photography has many draw backs compared to the enormous versitility offer by the SLR.

If you haven't done so already spend some time at Erwin Puts' web site. A google search will get you there easily enough. It is a massive resourse that us Leica folks are very fortunate to have.

Good luck, and let us know how you get on
 
I have a question regarding the frame-spacing. I enlarge my negatives full-frame. In order to do so I have to adjust my enlargeing board very precisely to create those "fine black frameline". I found that I had to adjust the height of the enlarger-head (thus the size of the enlargement) to keep my enlargement at the same size. My conclusion would be that different lenses (I use 28, 50 and 90) produce different size negatives. Ik have to add that I am an M6 newbie, although I never experienced this with my Nikon equipment...

Does anyone have an explanation?

Regards,

Arjen
 
> I've always understood it to be the case that there has to be a slight > variation in image size depending on the focal length of the lens - since > the angle that the light is passing through the gate must vary with focal > length eg. a wide-angle lens (especially a non-retrofocus wide-angle with > the rear element close to the film plane) would produce a slightly larger > image on the film that a tele. It would seem logical that this variation > must in itself vary from manufacturer to manufacturer depending on how > close to the actual gate the film is held in the camera and also on the > depth of the arrangement to allow the shutter to pass.
 
I shot with Nikon for about 10 years and moved to Leica less than a year ago.

50mm Summicron was first lens I used and saw immediate difference in sharpness and Leica "fingerprint"

Subjects seem to stand out more with Leica.

Mark
 
> It's been referred to as a "plastic" effect. It's interesting how > Leica-made images appear to have more than 2D to them. Slightly > controversially, I find that the lenses from a couple of generations ago > exhibit that more than the current ones (I shoot with up-to-date 50 and 90, > but with an early 70s 35 'lux, and it's the 'lux that most exhibits the 2 > 1/2 D-ness that I lurrrve soooo much).
 
Andy

Some years ago I was fortunat enough to be able to play around with a large number of Leica cameras and lenses. There does seem to be something special about the lenses made in the early 1970s both M and R. The images are sharper and have a quality all thier own. Don't now why. But it is definely there. You dont get it on later leitz nor MF Zeiss or large format Schneider for that matter. I've yet to use the lastest generation M lenses from Leica but have some on order and wait for their arrival with great anticipation.
 
> Can anyone tell if this shot was taken using Leica or Nikon. > Honest > opinion pls.[6-mths-old.jpg] >================================================================ Do you actually think anyone could make a qualitative judgement of a scanned photo transmitted over the internet and viewed on a consumer grade monitor ?
 
Back
Top