Re: [Leica] Using the R8 & 50 Summicron

["Dan S" <dstate1@hotmail.com>]

I am interested to hear your opinions on the 35-70 f4, particularly in 
comparison to the Summicron 50.  I am thinking of buying this lens but have 
only heard one report (Erwins), which was favorable.

My experiences with the Summicron R mirror your own.  It really is a great 
lens, nearly the equal of the M except in field flatness wide open.  
Normally as long as you are not shooting buildings etc this never becomes 
noticeable.

Best Wishes
Dan




26 Oct 1999 18:11:51 -0700
>
>On a recent trip to Arizona, I decided to try and travel light with an R8.
>
>I left the motor winder at home, and only took one lens, the 50 Summicron-R 
>and the SF-20 flash.
>
>I was simply delighted.  The SF-20 is adequate and easy to use for daylight 
>fill flash, and much much lighter than the Metz 40. The flash automatically 
>goes into 1 2/3 stop under mode when the camera is set to P and you are 
>outdoors.  In Arizona, with the high contrast from the bright sun and deep 
>shadows, fill flash is welcome, especially when shooting E100 VS.  The 
>SF-20 is a perfect travel companion.  Indoors you get no red eye, and it is 
>adequate.  I do miss the bounce/fill in of the Metz, but not its weight.
>
>It was hard remembering to advance the shutter without the winder, but the 
>lower weight and reduced noise more than made up for it.
>
>The 50 Summicron-R (a recent acquisition from Rich Pinto) was the biggest 
>pleasure.  This is one terrific lens.  Using the M system you never get the 
>pleasure of "seeing" through the lens.  Until now I had been using the f/4 
>35-70 Zoom, or f/2.8 lenses.  What a difference.  Looking through the R8 
>high eye point finder through an f/2 Summicron is like looking at a 
>brilliant movie.  The built in retractable hood is also very convenient.
>
>I tried taking available light pictures, similar to what I would take with 
>an M.  The results at f/2 (on Fuji Professional Press 800) were every bit 
>the equal of my M lenses.  Same glow and feel.  (Okay I am sure there are 
>differences, but my wife still said, "wow these are great.")
>
>Also, I took some really nice time exposures of the University of Arizona 
>campus at night.  With the R8 this was very easy; it would have been more 
>difficult with the M for exposures over 1 second.
>
>With the winder off, and the small 50 on front, I found the R8 noisier than 
>an M, but not so obtrusive that it interfered with the subjects.  They soon 
>ignored me, as they do with the M.
>
>As for the convenience of a zoom, it is clearly there, but I learned to 
>back up or move forward.  The 2 stops and small size made all the 
>difference in the world in being able to use the camera in available light. 
>  (I did find that I could not hand hold it to the same low speed as an M, 
>however.)  As for the viewfinder magnification, it is close to 1:1 (the 
>60mm seems exactly 1:1) so you could keep both eyes open, but I seem not to 
>with the SLR although I do it with the M.
>
>Oh, and using the matrix meter for the chromes there was not a single 
>missed exposure.
>
>Just thought you would like a user's report for a change.  No charts, no 
>graphs.  Just a happy camper.
>
>Bob Rose
>
>
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com