deepwhite
Well-known
Dear All,
I'm looking for a 35 equivalent for my R-D1s. I'm not considering any Zeiss lenses (I know they are great but the character is just not for me) so the only choice for a 24mm is the Leica Elmarit 24/2.8 ASPH, which is too expensive for me.
That also means the Elmarit 21/2.8 ASPH is out too. And I'm not considering the Super Angulon 21/4 since it's too slow for my need. That leaves me with only to choice: the SA21/3.4 and the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A.
And I'm torn between the two.
[price]
The average eBay price for an SA21/3.4 is $2000. I got a great offer of an Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A for $1000.
[size]
I didn't care about the size til recently. My main lens used to be the bulky Nokton 35/1.2; yet last week I got myself a Summicron 35/2 IV (7 element, should be the smallest among all S35/2s) and fell in love with its lightweight and compact size right away. Having mounting both an SA21/3.4 and an Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A onto the R-D1s, I have to say that I much preferred the SA21/3.4.
[character]
I've browsed through a lot of photos by both lenses, and have took a few myself with other people's. Since I'm using the 21mm on the R-D1s for a more "artistic work" purpose than "real world memory shots", the vignetting and thicker color of the SA21/3.4 is slightly better for my taste. (Only slightly, since the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A is not bad either.)
[speed]
My first lens is the Heliar Classic 50/2, and then the Nokton 35/1.2. The new prime lens on the R-D1s is the Summicron 35/2. The slowest lens I got is the Elmarit M 90/2.8. I shot with the R-D1s mostly at 200, sometimes 400 and 800 and never 1600, so f2.8 is basically my limit. I don't know how much slowlier the SA21/3.4 is to the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A, and if it's going to be a problem for me.
[no metering for SA21/3.4]
Is it a big problem? I don't know. I'm not a human metering machine. Far from one. So there are some shots that are just gone forever without AE mode. Yet on the other hand, since I'm using the SA21/3.4 for artistic work mostly, the inconvenience is not as bad as if it were a 35mm.
------
I've read some articles in RFF about both lenses, but I'd still love to hear some more opinions, for this could be my last lens purchase in 2008 and I'm much more cautious and nervous than ever.
Thanks in advance.
I'm looking for a 35 equivalent for my R-D1s. I'm not considering any Zeiss lenses (I know they are great but the character is just not for me) so the only choice for a 24mm is the Leica Elmarit 24/2.8 ASPH, which is too expensive for me.
That also means the Elmarit 21/2.8 ASPH is out too. And I'm not considering the Super Angulon 21/4 since it's too slow for my need. That leaves me with only to choice: the SA21/3.4 and the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A.
And I'm torn between the two.
[price]
The average eBay price for an SA21/3.4 is $2000. I got a great offer of an Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A for $1000.
[size]
I didn't care about the size til recently. My main lens used to be the bulky Nokton 35/1.2; yet last week I got myself a Summicron 35/2 IV (7 element, should be the smallest among all S35/2s) and fell in love with its lightweight and compact size right away. Having mounting both an SA21/3.4 and an Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A onto the R-D1s, I have to say that I much preferred the SA21/3.4.
[character]
I've browsed through a lot of photos by both lenses, and have took a few myself with other people's. Since I'm using the 21mm on the R-D1s for a more "artistic work" purpose than "real world memory shots", the vignetting and thicker color of the SA21/3.4 is slightly better for my taste. (Only slightly, since the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A is not bad either.)
[speed]
My first lens is the Heliar Classic 50/2, and then the Nokton 35/1.2. The new prime lens on the R-D1s is the Summicron 35/2. The slowest lens I got is the Elmarit M 90/2.8. I shot with the R-D1s mostly at 200, sometimes 400 and 800 and never 1600, so f2.8 is basically my limit. I don't know how much slowlier the SA21/3.4 is to the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-A, and if it's going to be a problem for me.
[no metering for SA21/3.4]
Is it a big problem? I don't know. I'm not a human metering machine. Far from one. So there are some shots that are just gone forever without AE mode. Yet on the other hand, since I'm using the SA21/3.4 for artistic work mostly, the inconvenience is not as bad as if it were a 35mm.
------
I've read some articles in RFF about both lenses, but I'd still love to hear some more opinions, for this could be my last lens purchase in 2008 and I'm much more cautious and nervous than ever.
Thanks in advance.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
21mm will not be a 35mm equivalent on the RD-1. 28mm is closer to 35mm on the RD-1. I would suggest the CV 28/3.5. A really great lens. Or the 28/2.8 Elmarit. I have the version ll and it's a stellar lens.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Hi Deepwhite
I would go with the 21 SA just cause I think its SIGNATURE is beyond compare....Tres Fab
there is no other lens that has that Old World Charm, coupled with a sixties trippiness and yet can also be quite MOD in Color
HOWEVER
everyone has warned me against buying it due to its large rear which may damage shutter mechanism (?).
If you look at TommyOshima & Moranns work on flickr
its Divine and their able to work with it and no damaged rd1(s)
so I FEEL your quandry
Right now I have for my RD1s:
55/ 2.5 Industar 61 my cheap russian fab len spot on
50/3.5 Elmar tiny & sweet beautiful tonality in B&W
15/4.3 CV / great lens for Street & Archtecture
75 /2. CV Heliar wonderful for Potraits beautiful Dreamy backgrounds (I wanted the 85 Summarex but its so Huge & ridiculous size on the rd1) but the signature is phenomenal very special like the sa21
Post some 21 pixs please.....
don't mind if there experimental
Best to You- helen
I would go with the 21 SA just cause I think its SIGNATURE is beyond compare....Tres Fab
there is no other lens that has that Old World Charm, coupled with a sixties trippiness and yet can also be quite MOD in Color
HOWEVER
everyone has warned me against buying it due to its large rear which may damage shutter mechanism (?).
If you look at TommyOshima & Moranns work on flickr
its Divine and their able to work with it and no damaged rd1(s)
so I FEEL your quandry
Right now I have for my RD1s:
55/ 2.5 Industar 61 my cheap russian fab len spot on
50/3.5 Elmar tiny & sweet beautiful tonality in B&W
15/4.3 CV / great lens for Street & Archtecture
75 /2. CV Heliar wonderful for Potraits beautiful Dreamy backgrounds (I wanted the 85 Summarex but its so Huge & ridiculous size on the rd1) but the signature is phenomenal very special like the sa21
Post some 21 pixs please.....
don't mind if there experimental
Best to You- helen
From discussions it sometimes seems there's no alternative to a camera's built-in metering other than "Sunny 16" or other guessing method. But hand-held meters do exist, and indeed are very useful. I particularly prefer incident metering, but am often seduced away by in-camera AE for the speed and convenience.
I recently found a (seemingly rare) Gossen Super Pilot SBC on eBay after dropping my old one. I sent them both off to Quality Light Metric for calibration, plus repair of the older one. A favorite meter, the Super Pilot is pocket-size, easy to use, and offers both direct and incident metering. If you get the SA 21mm, you might consider a hand-held meter like this, and Sekonic makes good comparable ones too.
I recently found a (seemingly rare) Gossen Super Pilot SBC on eBay after dropping my old one. I sent them both off to Quality Light Metric for calibration, plus repair of the older one. A favorite meter, the Super Pilot is pocket-size, easy to use, and offers both direct and incident metering. If you get the SA 21mm, you might consider a hand-held meter like this, and Sekonic makes good comparable ones too.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
I don't want to be disonnant here but... what kind of assessment can one make based on images posted online? It really intrigues me.
As for your question, I recall that the older SA has a deep rear element. It's usually not recommended for metered Leica bodies because it blocks the meter. Does your Epson have the meter placed like the M5, M6 and its successors? If so, your choice is metering by hand (not difficult) or any other lens.
Have fun shopping!
It really intrigues me.As for your question, I recall that the older SA has a deep rear element. It's usually not recommended for metered Leica bodies because it blocks the meter. Does your Epson have the meter placed like the M5, M6 and its successors? If so, your choice is metering by hand (not difficult) or any other lens.
Have fun shopping!
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
SolaresLarrave
hi -
take a peek at flickr / search: 21 super angulon
& you will defintely See this lens has a style , a signature all its own ...... aside of the vignetting which can be cool adding old world charm
be it on leica film cameras (the rear end fits)
or the M8 & rd1/s (rear too big)
best- helen
hi -
take a peek at flickr / search: 21 super angulon
& you will defintely See this lens has a style , a signature all its own ...... aside of the vignetting which can be cool adding old world charm
be it on leica film cameras (the rear end fits)
or the M8 & rd1/s (rear too big)
best- helen
ferider
Veteran
How about a Kobalux/Bower/Avenon 21/2.8 ? They usually run for around US 1000.
Roland.
Roland.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Dear Helen, I will do as you say. I've been intrigued about the way in which people talk about a signature or a look of a lens. Since I'm mostly concerned about the images, I'd like to know what these terms mean.
What should I look for? I'm serious about this. Thanks!
BTW, my name is Francisco
What should I look for? I'm serious about this. Thanks!
BTW, my name is Francisco
vieri
Leica Ambassador
Hello all, I have been just debating the same thing - being thorn between the S-A and the new Zeiss Biogon-C 4.5, on film though not digital, and ended up getting the S-A for about 700 euro. I will receive it in about 10 days, and will share my opinions and some pics then; the signature is the reason for my choice, plus one can get the Biogon any day if one wants to, while a very clean S-A for 700 euros doesn't happen every day
Looking forward to getting my new lens and starting photographing with it!
Looking forward to getting my new lens and starting photographing with it!
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Congrats Vieri
and YES i am sooooo Jealous
Can't wait to see your pixs
I am dead certain it will be Sublime.....You & the SA
Best-H
and YES i am sooooo Jealous
Can't wait to see your pixs
I am dead certain it will be Sublime.....You & the SA
Best-H
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Another alternative to a medium wide on a RD1 could be the just released Ultron 28mm f2.0. I have had the opportunity to use one for the last two month and it is impressive. At f2.0 and 0,7 meters it beats any of my other 28's (Elmarit 28 v.III, Color Skopar 28f3.5, Ultron 28f1.9 Asph and the 28f2,8 ZM Biogon). Going back through my files, it also looks sharper at f2 than the 28f2 Summicron Asph!
I have no experience in using the 21f3.4 on a RD1 or M8, but it would be a rather inconvinient lens on either one. I did try it when I was testing these two cameras and found it a bit clumsy to use.
I have no experience in using the 21f3.4 on a RD1 or M8, but it would be a rather inconvinient lens on either one. I did try it when I was testing these two cameras and found it a bit clumsy to use.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
A 28mm will be equivalent to a 42mm on the R-D1. That won't give you the 35mm eq. you were looking for. As you already noted, 24mm would be the closest 35mm eq. Since the 24mm ASPH is not within budget, that suggests the 25mm VC as a possibility, I suppose. That will give an eq, of 37.5mm.
But as to the choice of a 21mm: it sounds like the SA 3.4 has too many drawbacks for you. Note Tom's remarks above; plus your own reservations. I think the Elmarit would be a better bet. It will give you your f/2.8 speed, along with less vignetting. Also, what about the 21mm VC?
21mm Gives an equivalent of around 32mm; a 35mm eq. with a slight bonus toward the wide end.
But as to the choice of a 21mm: it sounds like the SA 3.4 has too many drawbacks for you. Note Tom's remarks above; plus your own reservations. I think the Elmarit would be a better bet. It will give you your f/2.8 speed, along with less vignetting. Also, what about the 21mm VC?
21mm Gives an equivalent of around 32mm; a 35mm eq. with a slight bonus toward the wide end.
maddoc
... likes film again.
The Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4 blocks the meter-cell on nearly all cameras (I have tested MP, M6TTL, and Hexar RF) but the results I get on film a very worth the small inconvenience. I love my SA-M
All shot on film.
All shot on film.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
i would not agonize over this one and get the 21mm VC M mount for wide and the 28mm/2.0 VC for speed. combined would be far less than the SA or 21 Leica pre-asph.
x-ray
Veteran
I owned the SA back in the 60 through the 70's. Shot thousands of B&W and a few color images with it. I now have the pre asph Elmarit and have had it for about twelve years. I've also shot thousands of images with the Elmarit.
I find it funny that the qualities that we felt were weaknesses when the lens was made are now the qualities most desirable to Leica geeks. Strange!!!
I find that 98% of the discussion of character is rubbish in my experience. Character is more a function of a persons personal vision of how the final image should be presented and a persons individual technique. Film, development, printing and or scanning plus the technique of printing (burning, dodging, contrast selection, paper selection, toning & etc) all play a bigger part in the final image than the lens it's shot with. The same is true if the neg is scanned.
Don't get into the mystical world of character. It 98% in a persons head and not on the film.
Either lens is fine but the Elmarit shines vs the SA. One note about the depth of the rear element of the SA. I personally have seen the shutter rub the back of the lens barrel on the SA. It's so close to the film that this can happen in some cameras.
Would I pay $2000 for a SA, NO!!! Not worth it in my book. $1,000 for the Elmarit, might. IMO, the Zeiss is the best choice on the market.
Get over the mental block about character and buy the Zeiss and learn how to print, process, scan and then make great images. The character of the final image is mostly from you and your decisions and not the lens.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Dear X-Ray
I'm not a leica Geek ....I only own one leica lens
I do DISAGREE RE: Character & Lenses
It does exist-
Lenses are known to have varying qualities
with RE: to softness,sharpness, crispness. oof background etc / talking glass & science not mysticism
Some lenses have more signature or draw quite differently from others , its not a mystical concept.
Anyway I'm NOT Preaching or Lost in a mental block just discussing and admiring what I like
and ENJOYING the company of RFF.......All in Good Fun
Best to You-
Helen
I'm not a leica Geek ....I only own one leica lens
I do DISAGREE RE: Character & Lenses
It does exist-
Lenses are known to have varying qualities
with RE: to softness,sharpness, crispness. oof background etc / talking glass & science not mysticism
Some lenses have more signature or draw quite differently from others , its not a mystical concept.
Anyway I'm NOT Preaching or Lost in a mental block just discussing and admiring what I like
and ENJOYING the company of RFF.......All in Good Fun
Best to You-
Helen
Last edited:
Captain
Well-known
With the 1.5 crop of the RD1 you would loose most of the vignetting charm I would think.
deepwhite
Well-known
Dear All,
Thanks for so many replies in so short a time. You guys are great.
(By the way, this afternoon when I was walking on the street, I heard "Torn Between Two Lovers" from some store's radio. I love this song, but this time it scared me a little.... What a coincidence.)
------
[What Happened On My Side]
I checked your replies before I went out this morning (14 hours ago). Then I got an offer from a local forum, a black Super Angulon 21/3.4 with the often-missing hood, front and rear caps, the finder and the hard-to-find 7-series filter. At USD$1600 it was more expensive than what Vieri paid for his SA21/3.4, but with a full package like this it's a better deal than what I could find on eBay so far.
So I went out and tested the lens with the R-D1s.
[Signature]
When I look for photos by a certain lens on the internet, I do wonder, sometimes, that how much - or how little - post-processing people did with the photos I like. TommyOshima's photos with the SA21/3.4 were what branded the Super Angulon name in my brain. Then from looking at other's SA21/3.4 photos, I have always imagined what the "signature" of the SA21/3.4 is like.
Then when I tried one today, I was very excited. Everything I've imagined about this lens turned out to be true: vignetting and high contrast and sharpness, all beautiful and natural, that I really don't think can be done in the computer. And, though there's the 1.5x crop factor with the R-D1s, the vignetting is still there.
So I bought it right there.
(I'm not saying that the SA21/3.4 is better than the Elmarit 21/2.8 I tested the other day; it's just about personal taste. The signature of the SA21/3.4 happens to be "my type of character", and also what I'm lacking with my current lens lineup.)
[Metering]
I didn't buy the finder, because I didn't think I'd use it on a film camera. (On the other hand, since the SA21/3.4 becomes 32 on the R-D1s, I think I should use a 28mm finder and leave some space within the frameline.)
No, no auto-exposure mode for the SA21/3.4 on the R-D1s. It would give a reading, but from 2-stop over to 4-stop, which is too wide a range to guess right. Also, due to the high contrast, there's not much room for tolerance. While with some other lenses a half-stop over/under can still be explained as "choices", with the SA21/3.4 it just looks wrong.
That's why I'm going to use it only with the R-D1s. With my current skill level, I'm often within 1-stop over to 2-stop under, and can usually get the right value in the 2nd or 3rd shot. I hope I'll get better than that.
[The Rear Element]
I'm pretty sure the bulky rear element never touches the internal parts of the R-D1s, as I didn't see any scratch or marks. Yet since I'm not an expert about camera mechanism, I'm not sure if everything is alright as it looks so far. Yet I have asked Tommy Oshima, and he said that he's been using the SA21/3.4 with his R-D1 for a long time without any problem, so I guess I don't have to worry.
[Bonus]
This lens can focus as close as 40cm. BUT I'll have to guess between 40~65cm, since 65cm is the closest distance that the rangefinder coupling works. Thanks to my past experience with the Rollei 35S, Minox 35GT and Zorki S, eyeing the distance is not that hard for me. Not to mention that even at F3.4 I still have about 10cm's margin for error.
[To MADDOC]
Great pics. Though I've seen them before. They're also part of the reason I couldn't get the SA21/3.4 out of my head. Great pics. Now you have to watch out, cause some day you might get an angry private message when my girl friend found out how much this lens cost and who "helped" pushing me into it....
[Thanks to All the Advices, Including the Ones I Didn't Take]
Some members suggested that I did not go for the SA21/3.4. Please know that I still thank you for your advice, and that the reason why I still got the lens was not because of I think what you said are not worth considering.
The truth is, just like maddoc said, when I saw the photos it took, I'm willing to tolerate all its drawbacks.
------
I'll post some photos as soon as I got time next week.
Again, thanks for every reply in this thread. I love you all.
Thanks for so many replies in so short a time. You guys are great.
(By the way, this afternoon when I was walking on the street, I heard "Torn Between Two Lovers" from some store's radio. I love this song, but this time it scared me a little.... What a coincidence.)
------
[What Happened On My Side]
I checked your replies before I went out this morning (14 hours ago). Then I got an offer from a local forum, a black Super Angulon 21/3.4 with the often-missing hood, front and rear caps, the finder and the hard-to-find 7-series filter. At USD$1600 it was more expensive than what Vieri paid for his SA21/3.4, but with a full package like this it's a better deal than what I could find on eBay so far.
So I went out and tested the lens with the R-D1s.
[Signature]
When I look for photos by a certain lens on the internet, I do wonder, sometimes, that how much - or how little - post-processing people did with the photos I like. TommyOshima's photos with the SA21/3.4 were what branded the Super Angulon name in my brain. Then from looking at other's SA21/3.4 photos, I have always imagined what the "signature" of the SA21/3.4 is like.
Then when I tried one today, I was very excited. Everything I've imagined about this lens turned out to be true: vignetting and high contrast and sharpness, all beautiful and natural, that I really don't think can be done in the computer. And, though there's the 1.5x crop factor with the R-D1s, the vignetting is still there.
So I bought it right there.
(I'm not saying that the SA21/3.4 is better than the Elmarit 21/2.8 I tested the other day; it's just about personal taste. The signature of the SA21/3.4 happens to be "my type of character", and also what I'm lacking with my current lens lineup.)
[Metering]
I didn't buy the finder, because I didn't think I'd use it on a film camera. (On the other hand, since the SA21/3.4 becomes 32 on the R-D1s, I think I should use a 28mm finder and leave some space within the frameline.)
No, no auto-exposure mode for the SA21/3.4 on the R-D1s. It would give a reading, but from 2-stop over to 4-stop, which is too wide a range to guess right. Also, due to the high contrast, there's not much room for tolerance. While with some other lenses a half-stop over/under can still be explained as "choices", with the SA21/3.4 it just looks wrong.
That's why I'm going to use it only with the R-D1s. With my current skill level, I'm often within 1-stop over to 2-stop under, and can usually get the right value in the 2nd or 3rd shot. I hope I'll get better than that.
[The Rear Element]
I'm pretty sure the bulky rear element never touches the internal parts of the R-D1s, as I didn't see any scratch or marks. Yet since I'm not an expert about camera mechanism, I'm not sure if everything is alright as it looks so far. Yet I have asked Tommy Oshima, and he said that he's been using the SA21/3.4 with his R-D1 for a long time without any problem, so I guess I don't have to worry.
[Bonus]
This lens can focus as close as 40cm. BUT I'll have to guess between 40~65cm, since 65cm is the closest distance that the rangefinder coupling works. Thanks to my past experience with the Rollei 35S, Minox 35GT and Zorki S, eyeing the distance is not that hard for me. Not to mention that even at F3.4 I still have about 10cm's margin for error.
[To MADDOC]
Great pics. Though I've seen them before. They're also part of the reason I couldn't get the SA21/3.4 out of my head. Great pics. Now you have to watch out, cause some day you might get an angry private message when my girl friend found out how much this lens cost and who "helped" pushing me into it....
[Thanks to All the Advices, Including the Ones I Didn't Take]
Some members suggested that I did not go for the SA21/3.4. Please know that I still thank you for your advice, and that the reason why I still got the lens was not because of I think what you said are not worth considering.
The truth is, just like maddoc said, when I saw the photos it took, I'm willing to tolerate all its drawbacks.
------
I'll post some photos as soon as I got time next week.
Again, thanks for every reply in this thread. I love you all.
x-ray
Veteran
I'm not using Geek in a negative way but referring to people engrossed in Leica.
In response to deepwhite, yes the vignetting can be reproduced under the enlarger or in the computer. No problem with reproducing the effect.
Helenhill, how do I know 98% of the "character is between ones ears"? I grant there are differences in lenses but in general they are EXTREMELY SMALL. I mean small to the point that you or any others can't tell me what lens I shot any particular image with. I'm extremely critical in my work and know my images and equipment better than most of you know the back of your hand. Looking back at my work since starting to use Leicas over forty years ago I myself can't look at a print or neg and tell you what lens model or brand it was shot with. Yes I can generally tell the focal length but not the lens, summicron, elmarit, elmar, canon, nikon, zeiss or pentax. The only way I know is by what equipment I was using at the time.
I did a test on one of the forums a couple of years ago. I posted images that were direct digital capture, 4x5, 8x10, 2-1/4 and 35mm film. These were from transparencies, prints and negs with my best printing and post treatment all scanned on a top of the line prepress fuji 5000 scanner. Guess what, NO PERSON COULD EVEN TELL ME WHAT FORMAT muchless whether digital or film or brand of lens and certainly not the model. One person got a few correct but he was an art director from New York.
Look at my gallery and post what you think some of the images were shot with, the ones not identified by what lens. Also there are some identified that are wrong. If you can get any percentage right then I will admit that I'm blind and don't know what I'm talking about.
Step up and take the challenge.
In response to deepwhite, yes the vignetting can be reproduced under the enlarger or in the computer. No problem with reproducing the effect.
Helenhill, how do I know 98% of the "character is between ones ears"? I grant there are differences in lenses but in general they are EXTREMELY SMALL. I mean small to the point that you or any others can't tell me what lens I shot any particular image with. I'm extremely critical in my work and know my images and equipment better than most of you know the back of your hand. Looking back at my work since starting to use Leicas over forty years ago I myself can't look at a print or neg and tell you what lens model or brand it was shot with. Yes I can generally tell the focal length but not the lens, summicron, elmarit, elmar, canon, nikon, zeiss or pentax. The only way I know is by what equipment I was using at the time.
I did a test on one of the forums a couple of years ago. I posted images that were direct digital capture, 4x5, 8x10, 2-1/4 and 35mm film. These were from transparencies, prints and negs with my best printing and post treatment all scanned on a top of the line prepress fuji 5000 scanner. Guess what, NO PERSON COULD EVEN TELL ME WHAT FORMAT muchless whether digital or film or brand of lens and certainly not the model. One person got a few correct but he was an art director from New York.
Look at my gallery and post what you think some of the images were shot with, the ones not identified by what lens. Also there are some identified that are wrong. If you can get any percentage right then I will admit that I'm blind and don't know what I'm talking about.
Step up and take the challenge.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Jeez X-RAYare you an alpha male...... Your mind is abit to heated for my taste
Yes your work is Quite Spectacular in its edginess !!
but I still have a right to my 'EYE' & Vision
in what I see
and that should not get you so irritated in your Opinions & Judging Me
Have you ever read any of Sean Reid's Reviews
he certainly does talk on occasion of older lenses & the way they draw
I'm certainly not the only one who sees like this
All the Best-
Helen
Last edited: