Re: [Leica] Using the R8 & 50 Summicron

["N.S. Ng" <nsnga@pacific.net.sg>]

Hello,

I have been using this lens for about 11/2 years, I purchased this because I
like to have a short range zoom and on occassions when I want to travel
light. Many of my shots were taken at f4. My other zoom is a 70-210
Angeniuex. I have the 50 Summicron R as well.

The 35-70 f4, is a fine performer. At its widest aperture, f4, its
performance is better than the 50 Summicron at f4. It seems to be sharper,
probably due to its higher contrast. I have also compared the performance at
35mm. end to my 35 mm. Summicron-M ( non- aspherical) at f.4 and I could not
see any difference. I have not compared this to my 35mm. Summilux-Asph. At
f4 at 70mm., the 35-70, shows better resolution and virtually no vignetting
compared to the Angenieux at 70mm.  It is probably unfair to compare a 15+
years old lens to a current Leica zoom. When it was introduced, the
Angenieux was a highly rated lens.

As far as handling is concerned, this lens mates well with the R8. I have
the R6.2, but I find the lens too large with it or rather the 6.2 just a bit
too small. But surprisingly it is quite light. The annoying feature here is
the rotating front which will be a nuisance when using a polarizer. F4
sounds slow, but on a bright day or using fast films, this should not be a
problem. When I travel light and do not wish to carry my 50 and 90
Summicrons, I will use this set-up. But I still carry my 28 Elmarit-R, when
I need a slightly wider lens.

I think Leica is not doing enough to promote this lens. For example, even
though this zoom has an aspherical element, it is not indicated anywhere on
the lens. I bet if Leica were to advertise or promote this as an aspherical
lens, it will increase in sales.

I recommend this lens if you do not mind the f4 aperture, the rotating front
and if you need a short range zoom. I believe in previous postings in this
NG, other 35-70 f4 users have reported favourable results with this lens.

Regards,

N.S.


- ----- Original Message -----
From: Dan S <dstate1@hotmail.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Using the R8 & 50 Summicron


> 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