35 mm photography [OT?]

I've been away from this newsgroup for more than 2 years helping a
startup company get off the ground. That's behind me now, and I'm
firing up my quadtone printer anew and starting over with PS 9.02. So
much to relearn!

A change I've observed is that this NG seems to be very much about
personal attacks and little about 35 mm photography. Back in the day,
there was indeed some ad hominem stuff, but the emphasis was on
"rec.photo.equipment.35mm." The language in many of the current posts
is not simply "colorful"; it's absolutely juvenile, indicating, to me at
least, a very limited vocabulary. Even some familiar names, clearly
adults, seem to have fallen into this mode. Must be the new zeitgeist.

So, at the risk of being off topic I'd like to discuss things 35 mm
(film). Again, back in the day, I got tired of waiting for the
long-rumored Leica M7 and bought a Konica RF which (you may have
forgotten) is a Leica look-alike and has proven to be a fine camera. I
don't regret the purchase. But I'm now thinking about the M7 again. In
particular, the VF magnification of the Konica is rather low (0.6)
making accurate focussing with a longer lens (~ 75 mm or 90 mm)
somewhat risky. (My standard lens on the Konica has been the 35-mm
Summicron.)

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?) Is there any down side to
adding the magnifier? What about the frame lines in the VF? Also, how
does wearing eyeglasses, full time, influence the choice, if at all?

BTW, I'm not open to suggestions to buy an M8. At this time I'm not
interested in digital or color. B&W film is where I am. And it's not
because I'm a neanderthal or "arsty-fartsy" (to paraphrase a recent
thread); I just don't know how effectively to add color to the kind of
photography I like to do. Maybe I'll eventually get over this "hurdle"
but not for the present.

Appreciate your comments.

HFL

--
Change hlockwood to hflockwood in email address

In article ,
Harry Lockwood wrote:

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?) Is there any down side to
adding the magnifier? What about the frame lines in the VF? Also, how
does wearing eyeglasses, full time, influence the choice, if at all?

I have an M6TTL 0.58 and the 1.25x. I'm left-eye dominant and wear
glasses, and the two combine to make the 35mm frame lines unusable for
me with a 0.72 viewfinder (I had a regular M6 before), so the 0.58 is
best for me. I do, however, like to use a 90mm lens, and, while it works
OK without the magnifier, adding it does make a difference, especially
for critical focus. With the magnifier the 35mm frame lines aren't
usable. Without, I can just barely see the 28mm frame lines (I don't use
that FL, so it isn't a problem for me).

I even have a 135/2.8 which works surprisingly well with the magnifier
(it uses the 90mm frame lines). It's a bit clunky to set up, but it
works, and I get accurate focusing out of that combo. I don't use it
much, but, being an oddball Canadian lens, the 135/2.8 is surprisingly
cheap for any Leica lens.

Glasses do get in the way, so it's well worth the bother to try to get
your hands on a .58 and a .72 if you can. I don't think the .85 would
work for anyone with glasses who wanted to see the 35mm frame lines.

Drew

--
Drew W. Saunders

dru (at) stanford (dot) eee dee you

Harry Lockwood wrote:


A change I've observed is that this NG seems to be very much about
personal attacks and little about 35 mm photography. Back in the day,
there was indeed some ad hominem stuff, but the emphasis was on
"rec.photo.equipment.35mm." The language in many of the current posts
is not simply "colorful"; it's absolutely juvenile, indicating, to me at
least, a very limited vocabulary. Even some familiar names, clearly
adults, seem to have fallen into this mode. Must be the new zeitgeist.

I find that simply ignoring it is the best policy. Hesitant to kill file -
as there are some good posts that would go as well.

As for me - don't do as much photography as I like. Seem to flit between a
Mamiya C330, Yashica Electro GS (or is it GT) and Ricoh GR1v. Perhaps I
will go digital as scanning takes too much time but I have got decent
results from this kit. Actually particularly like the Yashica, its great
when you don't want to mess around, you just want to take pictures.

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

I'm not in the know about the Leicas as the only one I had many long years
ago was the IIIG model RF. I now shoot mostly color, but if I need to send
anything to a good lab I do have B/W film in the freezer and I shoot some
slide too. As I use old cameras, I have Topcon Super D which will be going
in for repair next month, a 1930 Exacta, then comes my Exa, Exa II, and last
month the Pentex (not spotmatic) I was given and if I ever get everything
ready, I know have a name of a place that could fix the Voltlander
Bessimatic I have on display. But that's going to be at lest a year. Glad to
see another film user, I lerned my photography in the army and doing my own
B/W film then.


--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html


"Harry Lockwood" wrote in message
...
I've been away from this newsgroup for more than 2 years helping a
startup company get off the ground. That's behind me now, and I'm
firing up my quadtone printer anew and starting over with PS 9.02. So
much to relearn!

A change I've observed is that this NG seems to be very much about
personal attacks and little about 35 mm photography. Back in the day,
there was indeed some ad hominem stuff, but the emphasis was on
"rec.photo.equipment.35mm." The language in many of the current posts
is not simply "colorful"; it's absolutely juvenile, indicating, to me at
least, a very limited vocabulary. Even some familiar names, clearly
adults, seem to have fallen into this mode. Must be the new zeitgeist.

So, at the risk of being off topic I'd like to discuss things 35 mm
(film). Again, back in the day, I got tired of waiting for the
long-rumored Leica M7 and bought a Konica RF which (you may have
forgotten) is a Leica look-alike and has proven to be a fine camera. I
don't regret the purchase. But I'm now thinking about the M7 again. In
particular, the VF magnification of the Konica is rather low (0.6)
making accurate focussing with a longer lens (~ 75 mm or 90 mm)
somewhat risky. (My standard lens on the Konica has been the 35-mm
Summicron.)

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?) Is there any down side to
adding the magnifier? What about the frame lines in the VF? Also, how
does wearing eyeglasses, full time, influence the choice, if at all?

BTW, I'm not open to suggestions to buy an M8. At this time I'm not
interested in digital or color. B&W film is where I am. And it's not
because I'm a neanderthal or "arsty-fartsy" (to paraphrase a recent
thread); I just don't know how effectively to add color to the kind of
photography I like to do. Maybe I'll eventually get over this "hurdle"
but not for the present.

Appreciate your comments.

HFL

--
Change hlockwood to hflockwood in email address

On Feb 15, 10:52 am, Harry Lockwood wrote:
I've been away from this newsgroup for more than 2 years helping a
startup company get off the ground. That's behind me now, and I'm
firing up my quadtone printer anew and starting over with PS 9.02. So
much to relearn!

A change I've observed is that this NG seems to be very much about
personal attacks and little about 35 mm photography. Back in the day,
there was indeed some ad hominem stuff, but the emphasis was on
"rec.photo.equipment.35mm." The language in many of the current posts
is not simply "colorful"; it's absolutely juvenile, indicating, to me at
least, a very limited vocabulary. Even some familiar names, clearly
adults, seem to have fallen into this mode. Must be the new zeitgeist.

So, at the risk of being off topic I'd like to discuss things 35 mm
(film). Again, back in the day, I got tired of waiting for the
long-rumored Leica M7 and bought a Konica RF which (you may have
forgotten) is a Leica look-alike and has proven to be a fine camera. I
don't regret the purchase. But I'm now thinking about the M7 again. In
particular, the VF magnification of the Konica is rather low (0.6)
making accurate focussing with a longer lens (~ 75 mm or 90 mm)
somewhat risky. (My standard lens on the Konica has been the 35-mm
Summicron.)

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?) Is there any down side to
adding the magnifier? What about the frame lines in the VF? Also, how
does wearing eyeglasses, full time, influence the choice, if at all?

BTW, I'm not open to suggestions to buy an M8. At this time I'm not
interested in digital or color. B&W film is where I am. And it's not
because I'm a neanderthal or "arsty-fartsy" (to paraphrase a recent
thread); I just don't know how effectively to add color to the kind of
photography I like to do. Maybe I'll eventually get over this "hurdle"
but not for the present.

Appreciate your comments.

HFL

--
Change hlockwood to hflockwood in email address

Welcome back. You are correct. This is no longer a site for film
photography discussion. Digital has been so influential that the
contributors are predominately digital practitioners. There are still
several of us film aficionado"s monitoring the site but believe me, if
you make any positive statement about film you will be assaulted.
Those of us film folks still here just develop thick skin and work
around those who are obnoxious. And believe me they are. Some of their
mouths/brain (it is in that order for a reason) are very much
operating like their digital cameras on program mode.... same old,
same old product comes out. Some continually have the same thoughts,
same camera technique, same written opinions, same bigotry, same
prejudices about photography as their politics/beliefs month after
month. But stay the course, we film folks will respond to film
questions issues.

On Feb 15, 11:52 am, Harry Lockwood wrote:

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?)


First off, the eyepeice magnifier should have no effect on image
quality except to improve it through more accurate focusing.

My question to you is why would you blow $3500 for a M7 body and
another $280 for an eyepiece magnifier when you could get a MUCH
better body like the Fabulous EOS-1V (with its 100% viewfinder) for
about half the price of the M7?

I suppose you must have a tidy sum already tied up in Leica glass.
Otherwise, it is a bit like choosing a 1964 Volvo over a modern Lexus.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Feb 15, 11:52 am, Harry Lockwood wrote:

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?)


First off, the eyepeice magnifier should have no effect on image
quality except to improve it through more accurate focusing.

My question to you is why would you blow $3500 for a M7 body and
another $280 for an eyepiece magnifier when you could get a MUCH
better body like the Fabulous EOS-1V (with its 100% viewfinder) for
about half the price of the M7?

I suppose you must have a tidy sum already tied up in Leica glass.
Otherwise, it is a bit like choosing a 1964 Volvo over a modern Lexus.


Errrrrr.....The 1964 Volvo was a honey of a car, and when properly restored,
is probably worth as much as a new Lexus.......

"Harry Lockwood" wrote:

So, at the risk of being off topic I'd like to discuss things
35 mm (film).

Hi Harry,

www.apug.org

You won't be sorry. (And you won't be assaulted.)

Regards,
Ken

On Feb 16, 1:04 am, "William Graham" wrote:
I suppose you must have a tidy sum already tied up in Leica glass.
Otherwise, it is a bit like choosing a 1964 Volvo over a modern Lexus.

Errrrrr.....The 1964 Volvo was a honey of a car, and when properly restored,
is probably worth as much as a new Lexus

You make my point for me. The restored Volvo may fetch more on the
market just as the Leica is twice the price of a Fabulous EOS-1V. But
the Volvo isn't anywhere near the car rhat the Lexus is. Similarly,
the M7 can't hang with the Fabulous EOS-1V.

Well, back in the 70's I had my Topcon Super D ripped off, but I still had
my IIIG and I found a place that had a good Super D outfit, camera, exacta
lens and I was able to make a trade, my IIIG for the Super D outfit. I still
have that Super D body packed away, some 20 years later it needs the shutter
speeds adjusted (fast ones 250,500,1,000) Don't know why but it seems to be
the as the topcon ages the faster speeds hang up. Now adays I see the prices
for IIIG's and see why the guy made the trade. My super D I have been using
since I got it in 92 has reached the ago of shutter speed trouble and it's
going in next month for work, this will leave me with my Exacta and EXA's as
my main cameras, I could dig out the other super D and load it up for slow
speed useage. I have ONE camera that late this year or early next year will
go in for repair, it's been sitting on my TV case awatching time go by, my
Voltlander Bessamatice, When I got that super D in trade I saw this one
sitting in a trash can and asked about it, he gave it to me and it's rested
in sight ever since, where ever I've lived, two camera repair shops in
Honolulu wanted $500 to try to repair it I think there is sand inside as it
will not advance or move the film windup or tip the shutter. I know know of
a place back east that for $180 will do the repair. Why do I have this one?
I got one of them from a German Camera Shop in Germany when I was there in
the US Army, they even got my the manual back then in english and for 4
years I used that camera. It met it's end in Vietnam when a mortor round hit
my tent and blew everything to bits. The next day at the PX I got my first
Topcon Super D, all the other major brands where sold out but I've been
happy woth my topcon's.


--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html


"William Graham" wrote in message
. ..

"Annika1980" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Feb 15, 11:52 am, Harry Lockwood wrote:

So I have a question or two for any Leica users who may still frequent
this group. The M7 is available in standard VF mag of 0.72 but is also
available in 0.85, clearly better for longer focal lengths ( and these
old eyes.) An alternative would be the 0.72 mag model fitted, as
needed, with the 1.25 eyepiece magnifier. This would give a VF mag of
0.9 (and unity for the 0.85 VF). But how is the optical quality? (Or
is that a dumb question for Leica optics?)


First off, the eyepeice magnifier should have no effect on image
quality except to improve it through more accurate focusing.

My question to you is why would you blow $3500 for a M7 body and
another $280 for an eyepiece magnifier when you could get a MUCH
better body like the Fabulous EOS-1V (with its 100% viewfinder) for
about half the price of the M7?

I suppose you must have a tidy sum already tied up in Leica glass.
Otherwise, it is a bit like choosing a 1964 Volvo over a modern Lexus.


Errrrrr.....The 1964 Volvo was a honey of a car, and when properly
restored, is probably worth as much as a new Lexus.......