Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Greg, Evidently there are some shims between the body of the lens and the focusing mechanism. These make sure the lens is the right distance to the film plane. Sometimes they're the right thickness, sometimes they're not. You might want to check out Karen's site (perhaps someone mentioned this, sorry if I'm being redundant). http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-LSM-Standard.html~mainFrame I was thinking of picking up a 35 (Leica) for my IIIf, but they simply cost too much and they're not all that good (unless you spend a lot, and that defeats the purpose). I was looking at the Summaron f2.8 but it demands too much of a collector's premium. Those in the know say that the Jupiter-12 is every bit as good, if not better. Best, Daniel On 8/4/05, GREG LORENZO <gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > You wrote in part: > > > Greg, > > > I've been playing around with the Jupiter-12 on my IIIf. It's an f2.8 > > lens. > > > > These are not "plug-and-play" lenses. The Jupiter-12 focuses a bit in > > front of what I'm focusing on, so I give it a slight twist to a longer > > distance after focusing. The Jupiter-8 (50mm) focuses slightly (ever > > so) behind, so I twist it just a little bit closer after focusing. You > > can only tell when it is wide-open. > > > > I got a couple off list emails on this lens but no one else mentioned a > focus problem. I quess I'll find one locally, if possible, and shoot a few > frames to make sure focus is bang on. > > Your in-focus shots look pretty good for a budget priced lens. > > Thanks for the head's up. > > Regards, > > Greg > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >