the R4's are on the way

Tom A said:
I did run into Mr Ho at Lemon camera and we had a great talk and as he said, he got a bargain 25/4 for less than $100! I must admit, that if he haden.t bought it - i would have. although i already have a couple of them!
Click to expand...

Hi Tom,

It was a pleasure meeting you at Lemon: an iconic figure in a Leiconic place! I've been shooting with the 25/4 on my Bessa T (yes, bought the viewfinder, too - cost more than the lens!) and am very happy with the results). Thanks for your kind counsel!

Look forward to picking up my own R4 (M or A, not sure?) here in Hong Kong.

Best,

Adrian (Ho)
 
tom, do you happen to have a zm 25 handy?
i'm wondering about it on the r4.
i don't normally mind some corner blocking in the finder bit i'm thinking the lens is a bit long, especially with the hood attached, so the finder blockage might be more than i would care for.

joe
 
I'm wondering the same thing, Joe... The Biogons seem to stick out a bit further than the same-speed Leica lenses and the slower CV lenses. Even the cutout hoods, as you suggest, will add to the obstruction because they attach around the outside of the filter ring, increasing the diameter there (true not just for the Zeiss lenses...).
 
I did unearth my 25/2,8 and the 21/2,8 again and put them on the R4M. The hood and lens barrel of the 21 protrudes quite dramatically in the lower right hand corner of the finder. Removing the hood helps, but the ZI lenses are longer than the Leica versions (21/24) although if memory serves me, the leica ones are a bit fatter and the hoods bigger. You are going to have to "sweep" the area a bit to see what is hiding there with the 21.
The 25/2,8 is not as invasive, but you can see the barrel clearly in the lower 1/6 of the finder (with the 21 and hood it is the lower 1/4 of the view). Removing the hood on the 25 improves the situation considerably and just a slight "dip" will tell you whats hiding there!
These things might be important to some of you, but to me less so. I tend to scan the area with the camera at the eye and trigger the shutter when what i can see corresponds to what I want on the negative! Unless the light is really low, i probably will leave the 21/4P on the body and use the 21/25 ZI on the M2's instead. The release on the R3/R4 is smooth enough that you can handhold it at 1/8 and even at 1/4 of a second with the 21.
The R4A is an attractive alternative, but I find that AE and wide-angles requires that you keep compensating for the big spotlight in the sky. The M meter with its EV value system works better for me.
I am about 1/2 way through my processing and so far there are about 15 rolls shot with the R4M and another 15 equally divided betwen the M2 and R3M. I do admit to a bit of "wideitis" but my justification is that the R4 really works that well!
 
Mr Ho said:
Hi Tom,

It was a pleasure meeting you at Lemon: an iconic figure in a Leiconic place! I've been shooting with the 25/4 on my Bessa T (yes, bought the viewfinder, too - cost more than the lens!) and am very happy with the results). Thanks for your kind counsel!

Look forward to picking up my own R4 (M or A, not sure?) here in Hong Kong.

Best,

Adrian (Ho)
Click to expand...

Adrian, it is always fun to meet other "camera-holics" and Lemon is not a bad place to feed this habit. The 25/4 Snap-Shot is a great lens. Sometimes we get caught up in"focus" and forget that a 25 has enough depth of field to cover a multitude of sins.
The first bessa i owned was a Bessa L and the Snap-Shot Skopar. Great combination and it does free you from the habit of always checking framing. I found that I could judge angle and coverage quite well and just 'wave" the camera in the general direction. The lens is extremely sharp and if you get too much, it can be cropped without much loss of quality.
Hope to run into to you again, maybe at some other camera store. Hong Kong is not bad, but of course nothing beats Tokyo for this!
 
Mr. Ho,

Oh, you are a Hong-Konger as well ? Hope we could go out for a RFF member meeting here in HK in near future. What do you think ?

Dingo
 
summilux said:
tom, can the outer most frame be used as the frame for 15mm lens?
Click to expand...


I suspect that the 15 would be too wide to have 'secure" framing. However, the ZI 18/4 could probably be used in this manner. Great saving as the 18 finder most likely will cost about 60% of a R4M/A and it cant even take film or measure light!
 
Must stop reading this thread....!

I'd just talked myself out of a R4, but the enthusiasm is infectious!

So if I sell my Nokton 50 and my Ultron 35, I could buy the 28mm f1.9 and 40mm f1.4 plus the R4A and end up with:
R4A + 21mm f4 + 28mm f1.9
R3A + 40mm f1.4 + 75mm f2.5

Pretty sweet....
 
Tom A said:
The R4A is an attractive alternative, but I find that AE and wide-angles requires that you keep compensating for the big spotlight in the sky. The M meter with its EV value system works better for me.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about how to compensate the AE while shooting with 21mm lens, could you explain this a little bit? like when we need to and how much EV we need to +/-; thank you!
 
Wide angle lenses by their nature are inclusive, and with 90 degree coverage there's a fairly good chance of including bright light sources. For instance the sun, outdoors. So flare resistance is desirable, and one needs also to be aware that light sources in the scene read by the meter may lead to underexposure of your subject. Each situation will be different... So thoughtful metering is in order.
 
Doug said:
Wide angle lenses by their nature are inclusive, and with 90 degree coverage there's a fairly good chance of including bright light sources. For instance the sun, outdoors. So flare resistance is desirable, and one needs also to be aware that light sources in the scene read by the meter may lead to underexposure of your subject. Each situation will be different... So thoughtful metering is in order.
Click to expand...

Thanks!!! but is R4M have better metering than R4A?Why??? I've got a R2M, but not sure how much I need to compensate for EV though I used a 15mm lens for my EOS5D for a while (for digital image, we can do PS work to get the EV back easier:)).
 
newfinder said:
Thanks!!! but is R4M have better metering than R4A?Why??? I've got a R2M, but not sure how much I need to compensate for EV though I used a 15mm lens for my EOS5D for a while (for digital image, we can do PS work to get the EV back easier:)).
Click to expand...

With the R3M/R4M/R2M you can set the exposure at your imporatnt subject level. If you tilt or swing the camera. it will only affect the display, not the exposure. On the AE cameras, your shutterspeed will change as more or less less light eneters the camera. There is an AE-lock on the AE cameras, but i find that this slows me down. With the 21/25 it is very easy to underexpose the foreground when the exposure reading takes in the sky. It is not a huge problem and you will soon learn to automatically compensate. With the M versions, you can also do compensation for large bright or dark areas by using the EV+/- setting. The meter wants to translate everything to 18% grey and you have to disagree with it sometime. There is a tendency to be overconcerned with exposure. If you shoot color negative or black/white there is a good bit of latitude to cover up your mistakes. It is only when you get into 'chromes that you have to watch it.
 
will it be possible to see a wide angle ZI body? i guess the wider base length will clear up some of the viewfinder blockage. I once tried the Noctilux (without hood) on the present ZI body, there is no blockage of the viewfinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom