[Leica] Was UV, now on to better things

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

> 
> And speaking of optical acuity, I (and I think many other shooters) use
> M's much more for their functional virtues.  I got no aspherics ('cept
> the 15 VC, which hardly counts) or APO's.  The reason I don't shoot
> with a Pentax is that it's often too big, I can't focus as quickly or
> accurately and it's noisier.
> 
> In conclusion, I was just trying to present a compromise for those
> folks who don't want to risk full frontal element exposure all the time
> and don't use caps or hoods for protection.
> 
> The slipcover thing is pretty good.
> 
> 
> Bob Palmieri
>

Thanks for the even response to my diatribe Bob!

We have been barraged with the uv filter hype from every person we even
bought a lens from behind the glass counter darkly.
That fact that these people had been working at McDonalds the day before and
we'd not listen to them on any other issue makes it a bit of a puzzle as to
why we take this particular off brand of hype to heart.

Another one is the use of the yellow filter.
It's really death to skintone you don't want it on your lens all the time
either. And I am talking black and white! :)

I also find it amazing that I'm able to re address this dead horse every 5
moths or so with renewed vigor!!!
It puts "rewriting" into a new light with the time factor. As life goes by
and I meet people and these ideas get slept on and seen from many an angle.
And crystallized to a strange gleam.

Neopan 1600 has also most of the past 5 years been my fave flim.
I use it with a B+W 060 yellow-green [11] bringing my ISO down to 800 which
is great because at f16 at 1000th that's when the sun is out.

I don't think of this filter as "protecting the lens" because if I bump the
thing the filter shatters and then those sharp pieces hit the lens which in
many a case I feel would have done otherwise just fine.

But it does good not bad things to skin tones while making for a truer
panchromatic ness of tones. Skies you don't have to underexpose for. Foliage
which doesn't block up dark un naturally.

It's a filter which really does something to justify it's abomination in
front of your work of art optic.

By the way I spent an extra 20 bucks and waited an full extra 2 weeks to get
this lens made (for me?) in the super multi coated version what ever they
call it. I think for what becomes in effect your outer element coating is a
big factor and should at least be as sophisticated as the one on your lens
if not more so.

This not for one second makes me think to shoot sans lens hood.

I prefer lenshood extra bold extended with added ligatures.

I do agree with your point that such issues would not be geared toward that
so called ASPH edge which many look at as a mixed bag.

But to the subtle qualities of the older Leitz optics.

Of which I just bought into with my new 40 Summicron Wetzlar with its
distinctive .75 instead of .50 thread pitch and funky rubber hood which I'm
almost tempted to leave at home instead of breaking it any minute.
There's a work around I'm considering with a ring you get and put grooves in
and then put on a rectangular 35mm hood for 75 bucks.
But I'm sold on the optic and like it's "older" look it gives my images
which as soon as I figure out my "make website" button on my Photoshop CS
I'm going to upload for LUG perusal.
Now that I've Disk Warriored my system I'm going to give it another shot
today. Yesterday I hit the button and it started opening up system 9!


I think we under estimate how tough our front element is.
Unless we are talking about the notorious very early Leica coatings from I
don't know, the 30's and 40's.

And at the beach with the wind and salt air blowing I'd go for a real filter
in black and white or in color a polarizer or 81a or something that does
something positive and useful other than screwing up my optical formula.








Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/