I paid a lot of money, so why not use it?

I love all my classic 50's - right now I'm on a Sonnar kick so especially the Zeiss 50/2 from 1937 & the Nikkor 50/1.4 - so I know what you mean. Neither are in the same ballpark but the reality is that's what a camera or a lens is for - to be used. They exist as tools to be make light into images over and over and over and if they get dinged up and brassed well, so much the better... My 240 is just barely starting to show signs of use, but I'm trying... that's the fun right? Otherwise why bother?

I want to see pictures from them 😀
 
I usually put a new lens on the camera and leave it there for ages. I fell over (was tripped by a low wire) and fell on the road with a Leica and binoculars. A minor bright mark on the top of the camera. Bad graze on my arm. Almost run over by the rubbish collection truck. That’s the sum total of visible damage to any equipment in decades. I did bend the focus lever of my Summaron M, needing repair. Can’t see any fracture likely on resale by using your lens. Can’t see the price being justified if you don’t use it. I love putting silver lenses on a black camera.
 
Last edited:
Nice lens. I reckon any lens sold new by Leitz should come with a sign for the user to wear. I AM A LEICA PERSON.

(Says he with a 50+ year old Summaron 35/3.5 LTM on a iif. With a Hoya UV and a China-made lens hood!!)
 
That's the spirit, Kivi! Better than worrying about keeping it pristine and hidden away somewhere you don't remember where it was stashed.

PF
 
Back
Top Bottom