wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

in 35mm and digital imaging, there is nothing better than the 35mm and 50mm summicrons and summiluxes. the 90mm f2.8 elmarit is a stunning little, albeit heavy lens. the 90mm f2 summicron asph is something to behold, but a little too large for me, hence the 90mm f2.8.

no lens on an slr or dslr will match rangefinder cameras due to the mirror box infringing on the sensor. the rear elements of rangefinder lenses are closer to the sensors and film planes of digital and film cameras. just a matter of near placement of the rear element.

and no one makes lousy film cameras or digital imaging devices or lenses-not worth the waste of time and effort.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Bebu, you know that's not true! According to all the Df owners, the Df is the most handsome camera on the planet, still I've yet to see a decent shot taken with one!!
So there goes THAT theory!!!
SS

asiafish Loc: Bakersfield, CA

I have the latest 35 Summilux and with very few exceptions, the only time I take it off of my M-E is to put it on my M Monochrom, which usually has the 50 Summits on it. My 90mm is the previous-generation Summicron (not the aspherical) which performs much like the Elmarit at all common apertures, but opens another stop and weighs a ton (mine is heavier silver chrome on brass).

There is more to it than lens quality and non-retrofocus designs. Leica sensors, while hardly cutting edge, are beautiful. The CCD M9 generation have no AA filter, and while they lack the dynamic range of a modern CMOS sensor, they do have a very film-like rendering and have color tuned to resemble Kodachrome (they re Kodak-designed sensors). The M Monochrom looks much like Panatomic X in its tonal characteristics, again no accident.

Just as much as I love the modern Leica lenses, I also really like the looks of the Leica sensor when using vintage glass. I own a 1937 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm f/1.5 Sonnar (uncoated) and a coated 1943 Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm f/2 Sonnar T. Those lenses have a very different look than modern glass, but are delightful when combined with the film-like look of the CCD sensor.

Here is the M-E with the modern 35 Summilux

L1001988 2 by Andrew F, on Flickr

L1001985 2 by Andrew F, on Flickr


Here it is with the semi-modern (1996 or so) 90mm f/2 Summicron

L1002266 by Andrew F, on Flickr


And here it is with the ancient 1937 5cm Sonnar

Mrs Kimura by Andrew F, on Flickr

L1000252.jpg by Andrew F, on Flickr

L1000231.jpg by Andrew F, on Flickr

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

i really enjoyed your photographs. i think the monster 90mm f2 chrome summicron is still a great lens. personally, i'd chose it over the asph model just because i like what it can do with my m4 and freezer full of panatomic x. probably the greatest film for black and white ever devised. but that's just me. the zeiss sonnars are utterly cool! you were really smart to pick those up. great lenses never, ever, go away; and those are two of the best. i'm glad you like your monochrom. i had one, but digital imaging is too abstract for me. being ancient, i love my m4, 3f, with the f2 summar 50mm, and my cl with the 28mm rokkor - not the greatest lens in the pantheon, but still, nice. i'm currently looking at the leica m analogue body - i think i'm going to have to take a chunk of my retirement out and get one while they are still available. sort of looks like a nifty m3!

again, really great photos, but then, you use leica and that says a lot about your commitment.

asiafish Loc: Bakersfield, CA

My 90 Cron isn't the massive one, it looks like the new ASPH model on the outside and is one of the last Walter Mandler designs (renders a lot like the 75mm Summilux).

I totally agree about film. I also own and use an M5 (usually has the f/2 Sonnar on it) and use my Canon lenses on a 1987-vintage EOS 650 body, which surprisingly does a pretty good job, even with the 50mm f/1.2L wide-open.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

That's because I don't own one!