The confusion is on my part.
Oh, silly me, since it said EBC, I was thinking of the old M42 mount versions.
Not really knowing if they made an EBC M42 35/1.4.
Sorry...

Jman13 wrote:
buggz2k wrote:
I would be interested in how this compares, and differs from the latest Fuji 35/1.4.
Do you have both?


I'm slightly confused...this is the 35/1.4.

Hi,

Brown (UPS) showed up just a while ago with this...

Fun time...

Edd

I'm gonna get one of these two Zeiss' in the next month: 21mm f2.8 or 50mm Makro.

I need the 21mm more, as I already have a 55mm Nikon Micro, but the 50 is more affordable and I could also use it for full length portraits. I wish I could afford to buy both now.

Decisions, decisions.

roboticspro wrote:
Hi,

Brown (UPS) showed up just a while ago with this...

Fun time...

Edd
You should have fun with it, I really like the 85/1.9 Super Tak, has awesome bokeh, congrats.

Cant afford that expensive glass. Heres a $10.00 item from last Sundays Philly antique camera trade show.
Harry Palmer

carstenw wrote:
VladiD wrote:
Went a little alt-crazy lately. 203FE + 110/2 and Rolleiflex 2.8 FX. Now looking to add a 4x5 camera in the near future, just don't know where to start.

If you want portable and rugged German metal, get a Linhof Technika V or Master. If you don't need portability, then any number of Linhof or Sinar cameras will do the trick. If you want something portable, lighter and smaller, yet rigid, with a classically inspired design, get a Chamonix 45N2. If you want a real classic, with the compromises that entails, then look at some older American folders.

I have a V/Master hybrid and want to switch it for a Chamonix when I get around to it sometime. Both are great.

Thanks Carsten and buggz2k for the input, appreciate it! I am digesting as much information about folders as much as possible, including lenses and operation, before making a decision. By American folders, did you mean Graflux's?

I meant more something like a Kodak or a Deardorf:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup4x5.html

My user-condition vI Lux-M 50 turned out to be a very early (1961) vII with a dented filter ring. I like it. Both wide open.

Mamiya 645:
35mm N f3.5
80mm Macro f4
120mm A-Macro f4
on mirex.
I liked them so much I traded a bunch of lenses and bought an A99 to use them on!

VladiD wrote:
Thanks Carsten and buggz2k for the input, appreciate it! I am digesting as much information about folders as much as possible, including lenses and operation, before making a decision. By American folders, did you mean Graflux's?

For me, not necessarily American folders.
I like the folding field cameras, both from the classic makers, and the modern makers.

Contax Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 100mm f/3.5 AEJ.

Ninja!!

Mescalamba wrote:
Ninja!!

Barely. Ninja in training, maybe.

Big brother is definitely a ninja!

Jim, that 100/3.5 is a great lens .... this was a stitch (1/2 a dozen verticals I think on a 5N) that I've printed 20x60 with just super detail
http://www.pbase.com/mike_broomfield/image/142553050/original

Mike

Hi Mike.

Beautiful photo. You should hook up with these folks to put it online with a "drag and zoom" function.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html

from http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1191937

I picked up the Sonnar 100/3.5 to bridge the gap between my CZ 35-70/3.4 and Mamiya A 200/2.8 APO, which is sometimes shared by my EF 135/2L.

Cheers, Jim

Interesting how the T* coatings change from magenta and gold to purple and green. Is the 100/2 an MMJ?

timballic wrote:
Interesting how the T* coatings change from magenta and gold to purple and green. Is the 100/2 an MMJ?

Yes. They're very different. Both are AEJ lenses. The lighting is the same.

freaklikeme wrote:
My user-condition vI Lux-M 50 turned out to be a very early (1961) vII with a dented filter ring. I like it. Both wide open.

sweet! looks like it should be a good match for the 35 m-lux.

sebboh wrote:
freaklikeme wrote:
My user-condition vI Lux-M 50 turned out to be a very early (1961) vII with a dented filter ring. I like it. Both wide open.

sweet! looks like it should be a good match for the 35 m-lux.

I like it a lot. I was hoping for better bokeh close up, and it's marginally better, but not by much. I need to see how it measures up to my 1973 Cron, but I will say the wide open performance is enough to make me want to keep it. And I think it might be a hair better a f/2, but we'll see. It was fifty bucks cheaper than the Cron. The dented filter ring doesn't bother me and it's in otherwise excellent shape, so I think the Cron will go.