how "historic" are you with your gear?

[traveler_101]

It would be interesting to see if the pattern of answers here have anything to do with occupation and educational background, not level of education, but subjects/fields studied.

 

[OddE]

It would be interesting to see if the pattern of answers here have anything to do with occupation and educational background, not level of education, but subjects/fields studied.

-I, for one (who isn't trying very hard to be historically correct!) am an engineer - ever the pragmatists, huh? If it fits, use it. 🙂

 

[uhoh7]

Well, they all think the M9 is 50 years old anyway, and it shoots my classic glass just great.

My oldest are from 1937 and I have quite a few lenses from the 50s and early 60s, mostly Zeiss, Canon and Nikon, except I do have a red scale elmar.

My Ms start with late Mandler works: 28 elmarit v3, 50 cron, 135/2.8 and the 75 Lux.

I have a weakness for 50 Sonnars, from CZJ to Sonnetar.

The M9 loves every one, except the 28 Elmarit which is quite weak on the edges. Taking that to heart my wider stuff is all modern, ZM 18, SEM 21 and 28 Cron. All of which can take your breath away on the ol M9 😉

 

[finarphin]

Yes.... My circa 1952 kit:

Leica IIIf BD
Leica Summitar 50mm f/2
Leitz Summaron 3.5cm /f3.5
Leica Elmar 90mm /f4
Rolleiflex Automat MX (K4A)

Yay. I have a Leica IIIf BD, and a 90mm f/4 Elmar. My 50mm lens is a collapsible Summicron.

 

[Mudman]

Most of my gear is historical, because I can't afford the new stuff 😱P My first M was an M3, and all of my M lenses are from the 50's, minus two CV lenses (28 f2 and 35 f2.5). I had the summaron for a while that was nice, but I couldn't afford to keep two 35's in the arsenal and the CV was more practical with it's stop advantage over the f3.5 lens.