Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Focusing 19mm R; Kodachromes and 81 (KR) filters
From: "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:28:57 -0400

Martin,
First, DOF will take care of you regarding the 19 on the R.  The reason
you can't tell the difference between 5 meters and infinity is because
there isn't one.

As to telling the difference between the 21 Elmarit last version and the
19, technically yes.  The new 21 is a better lens than the 19.
Practically see a difference on film, probably not with Kodachrome 200
but possibly with a slow B&W film.

I believe what you are confusing is the focusing helical of the R vs.
the M system.  Almost all reflex lenses (macro lenses being the prime
exception) focus in about a half turn.  This is done to make it easy to
see the image snap into focus on the screen, the user's needs to see the
image come into focus.  With a RF system, a much longer throw works
better as you can slide the patch into alignment with a measured
movement: if you had a short throw you would over shoot your focus much
of the time.

Don
dorysrus@mindspring.com

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Martin
Krieger
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 9:07 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Leica] Focusing 19mm R; Kodachromes and 81 (KR) filters

Two questions:

1.With the 19mm R, after the 5 meter mark I have no idea if I am in
better
focus there or at infinity for most of my "scenics" which begin say 20
feet
or more in front of me. I use the grid screen (so perhaps I would do
better
with a split image etc screen?). Would I get sharper pix using an M/.58
with
the 21 mm.  Think in terms of very great enlargement, where one is
trying to
discern a particular detail.

2. I am trying to understand the difference between the Kodachromes 64
and
200. I find the 200 to be more open and airy, so to speak, not blocking
up
shadowy areas, even more latitude in the highlights. Is this correct. I
gather that the 200 is more magenta in its balance, and this deals with
the
overly blue  (UV caused) images I get with 64.
    Also, and 81A seems not to be enough to deal with the blueness. What
do
you recommend.

Thanks very very much,
Martin

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html