Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
I often use the elmar 50 - 2.8 collapsible on my M8, I find it to be a very
sharp and also soft lens, cf this portrait of my brother in law Bernard. Not
too good for landscapes, though.
Jean-Michel<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Jean-Michel/PORTRAITS/PORTRAITS.jpg.html>
> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 16:51:41 -0400
> From: mark at rabinergroup.com
> To: lug at leica-users.org
> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
>
> When my X, Karen who many of you know got her M6 a decade back her choice
> of
> glass was the modern 50 2.8 Elmar collapsible which she got in "chrome". I
> was very envious of it but now have thanks to a LUG friend a very old 3.5
> 50
> Elmar collapsible which came with my IIIF. I do feel very Barnack like when
> shooting with it. The results I've gotten with it for me have plenty of
> resonance; glow; fingerprint. Though I have a 3.5 35mm Summaron and a 90
> elmar I only get this feeling when using the 50 which I believe is decades
> older.
>
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photography
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>
>
> > From: Jim Nichols <jhnichols at lighttube.net>
> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> > Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:07:32 -0500
> > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
> >
> > George,
> >
> > I think you will find that the 50mm 2.8 Elmar is the exception to the
> > rule.
> > It was a modernization and slight improvement on the 50/3.5 Elmar, and
> > kept
> > the same name.
> >
> > Jim Nichols
> > Tullahoma, TN USA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "George Lottermoser" <imagist3 at mac.com>
> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 2:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film!
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Jul 14, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote:
> >>
> >>> Well, I have several of those too, Mark. When I wrote "old" I meant
> >>> the old 50/2.8 not the modern "new" 50/2.8 Elmar. I'd love to have one
> >>> of those. I keep my eyes open every Friday.
> >>
> >> I thought 2.8 always = elmarit
> >> no?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> George Lottermoser
> >> george at imagist.com
> >> http://www.imagist.com
> >> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information