Latest thoughts on my gear

M

merciful

Guest
Getting (and enjoying) the Hexar AF has made me think more positively about the 35mm focal length, a length that I've heretofore found difficult and used little. I have a Canon 35/1.8 for my M2, but I'm thinking seriously now about getting rid of the M2 and picking up an M6 (since no-one seems to want to sell me an M5) and a pre-ASPH Summilux. I know there are a lot of folks who think the M2 is the best thing ever, but I think the M3 is, and I'd like to have a metered body around (and I can't really see having three M bodies in the house.)

What do you all think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds good to me if you have your heart set on a metered body, there is no sense in keeping M2. You might want to try out the pre asph 35 lux first before you get rid of your Canon 35. You may not like the lux's performance at wide aperatures, some people really knock it.

Bob
 
And I'd say the same as for the 35/1.8 if I hadn't picked one up myself yesterday :)

Keep an eye open for a nice M6, p.net has had a couple them going for less than $1000 recently.

35 is my fav focal lenght by far, so I can truly understand you being called by it.
 
Thanks, Bob. I've heard some complaints, but I suspect they're fom sharpness-freaks (and I suspect I'll be set straight if I'm incorrect on that.) Enjoying my Summitar as I do, I find that sharpness isn't terribly high on my list of requirements.

Nikon Bob said:
You may not like the lux's performance at wide aperatures, some people really knock it.

Bob
Click to expand...
 
The camera body is just the thing holding the film steady behind the lens. If a metered body frees up more of your brain for you to look with, go for it.

Personally, because I am a slow-thinking idjit with the reaction time of a lava field, I wouldn't run around taking important pictures with an unmetered body any more. Others can, and do, and get terrific results; me, I know my limitations. My guesstimated exposures are usually gross over/under. (I also like really tiny cameras. Guess why I've gravitated to CLs?)

I own and like some 35mm lenses, but still I can't get my head around using them as all-rounders. They see too much for my taste. That said, a good, sharp, fast 35mm lens can be a day-saver. When the aliens finally land and begin to eat our livers and worship our kittens, I want a sharp 35mm f2 on the camera. And, pictures where everything is in crisp focus are a treat to print.

If you're going to buy a 35mm lens, buy the best you can afford. It can be smooth, while still being sharp.
 
Just to play devil's advocate: ;)

Aside from the MF and extra stop, what will that setup (M6/Summilux) do that your new Hexar can't?

I have no experience with the M6's meter, but the Hexar's is extremely accurate, especially in manual (spotmeter) mode. The 1/250 top speed doesn't count because of your low-light shooting style, and in fact, I bet you can handhold the Hexar AF successfully to a slower shutter speed than the M6 due to the shutter design.
 
I like to play the other side of just about every question.

And the answer is (save for the two points you mention, which are both pretty important ones, really): just about nothing. But I can't have just one M body, because I need a backup that I can use my 50mm and 85mm lenses on; and a metered body lets me go out with the a body and a couple of lenses and leave the big Sekonic meter at home.

And I kind of have to spend some money before the end of the year to avoid some tax consequences.

From the feel of the Hexar, I bet I can hand-hold it successfully at 1/4, well more often than not. Especially in a bar.

ray_g said:
Just to play devil's advocate: ;)

Aside from the MF and extra stop, what will that setup (M6/Summilux) do that your new Hexar can't?
Click to expand...
 
Biggles said:
I wouldn't run around taking important pictures with an unmetered body any more.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't do it ever. In the lit world, I can come close enough for government work, but in the places I really get down to business, there's no latitude left in the Tri-X for mistakes. The meter is always there when I'm working.

Biggles said:
They see too much for my taste. That said, a good, sharp, fast 35mm lens can be a day-saver. When the aliens finally land and begin to eat our livers and worship our kittens, I want a sharp 35mm f2 on the camera. And, pictures where everything is in crisp focus are a treat to print.
Click to expand...

I'm just getting over the "see to much" thing: just getting used to getting closer, and even cropping (which I've had trouble doing before.)

I prefer, though, pictures with very nearly nothing in crisp focus.
 
i wont get into the camera body/meter thing just cause...but for your 35, here's a little trick to help you get used to it.
treat it like a 50, use the 50mm framelines as a 'guide' know that there is more in the photo. it's a way more relaxed way of shooting but it works like heck for me.
soon your mind/eye will allow for the 35 framelines and know the difference between 35 & 50 and your shots will look more like what you were looking at.

sounds more complicated than doing it.

joe
 
merciful said:
I prefer, though, pictures with very nearly nothing in crisp focus.
Click to expand...

Okay, fine; I understand. Just get yourself a lens that transmits that crisply to the film.

You can make slurry from diamonds, but you can't make diamonds from slurry (without a whole shitload of pressure and unsharp masking).

But yes, I hear you. I used to shoot a lot of barroom scenes. If only I could figure out this scanning crap...

Please feel free to PM me next time you decide to drink in Montreal.
 
My Canon is pretty crisp, but it's not terribly pleasant. I figure there should be plenty of "Leica glow" to the old Summilux. But hell, if there isn't, one can always sell for what one pays.

Scanning's not so hard; but then again, I get paid to do a lot of it, so I learned quick.

I just may be in Mtl. quite soon. I see that the L'Amère à Boire is on in the cask this week.


Biggles said:
Okay, fine; I understand. Just get yourself a lens that transmits that crisply to the film.

You can make slurry from diamonds, but you can't make diamonds from slurry (without a whole shitload of pressure and unsharp masking).

But yes, I hear you. I used to shoot a lot of barroom scenes. If only I could figure out this scanning crap...

Please feel free to PM me next time you decide to drink in Montreal.
Click to expand...
 
merciful said:
From the feel of the Hexar, I bet I can hand-hold it successfully at 1/4, well more often than not. Especially in a bar.
Click to expand...

I bet you can. At 1/4 and f/2, you only need to push the tri-x to 3200, and you'll be handholding at EV 0.
 
merciful said:
Thanks, Bob. I've heard some complaints, but I suspect they're fom sharpness-freaks (and I suspect I'll be set straight if I'm incorrect on that.) Enjoying my Summitar as I do, I find that sharpness isn't terribly high on my list of requirements.
Click to expand...

You will not here any from me but I seldom use it wide open. I am glad you suspect sharpness freaks are to blame, so do I. I think you will really like the lens.

Bob
 
I picked up a 35mm pre-asph lux about a week ago.
It is one of the later versions (titanium from '92). My experience so far is that it is perfect usable at all apertures. Even at f2.0 It is hard to tell the diffrence in sharpness with my 35 cron asph IN DESCENT LIGHT. In low-light conditions the asph clearly wins with crispier results.... because of lack of contrast. The same with 1.4 ... perfect and more than sharp enough for portraits (dof effects) in good light but not the best for shooting in really low light. Stopped down it is almost impossible to tell the difference from the cron.
Perhaps in large prints ... but i did not test that ... and have no intentions too.

Yes it sure has a different signature than the cron........ but an enormous difference in sharpness is not what i see as THE difference in normal day to day use with the cron.

Han
 
Last edited:
I say get a metered body for general shooting and keep the M2 or M3 for a super wide angle lens, where you can shot without the need of the meter that much..
 
I have three M bodies in the house and I can assure you it doesn't worry me a bit. And I enjoy them all very much! :)

Keep the M2. :)
 
Well, there it is: a fine RFF user offered me an M5 that's had a recent $500 grease job at Golden Touch, and you can all figure out the rest. Further details when it gets through Customs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom