hemisferico wrote:
I love your work with this lens. . .wish I could find one.
thanks!
hemisferico wrote:
Also-have you ever tried the 350 telyt with Canon teleconvertors?
i don't shoot canon or have any teleconverters, so no. i expect it would be pretty hard to work with on a teleconverter given the length and relatively small aperture.
sebboh wrote:
i don't shoot canon or have any teleconverters, so no. i expect it would be pretty hard to work with on a teleconverter given the length and relatively small aperture.
Yes, I guess you are using a NEX, I'm just looking for alternatives to the Leica Apo 1.4. My 250 Telyt is Leitaxed for Canon EF and it looks to me like the Canon EF extender 1.4 II would work without interference problems.
hemisferico wrote:
Yes, I guess you are using a NEX, I'm just looking for alternatives to the Leica Apo 1.4. My 250 Telyt is Leitaxed for Canon EF and it looks to me like the Canon EF extender 1.4 II would work without interference problems.
If it does fit, you'll have to tape the contacts on the converter facing the camera. You might also try the Sigma 1.4x DG. I had much better luck with that one on alts than the Canon.
hemisferico wrote:
Yes, I guess you are using a NEX, I'm just looking for alternatives to the Leica Apo 1.4. My 250 Telyt is Leitaxed for Canon EF and it looks to me like the Canon EF extender 1.4 II would work without interference problems.
actually most of my shots are with a 4/3 camera. i took a few with the NEX just to test it out, but you really need a viewfinder to track anything with a lens that long. the most recent photos have been with a a55.
sebboh, please give me a feedback on using the a55 plus the 350/4.8, in particular with the focus. In another forum someone told me that focusing with this lens, a bit heavy, isn't so easy... Now I'm using a 180 telyt 3.4 multiplied x2, but I need to have more reach.
quick question in between: are all the Summicron 50/2.0 with inbuilt hood optically identical?
I have an offer for one with a Serial number of 2.837.... so that should be from 1976-1978, ProdNr should be 11215, it is the first version with E55 or series 7 filter and inbuilt hood, 2 or 3 CAM (can't see this properly), made in Canada. is it worth 260 €?
thank you for advice from a Leica newbe
cyra wrote:
quick question in between: are all the Summicron 50/2.0 with inbuilt hood optically identical?
I have an offer for one with a Serial number of 2.837.... so that should be from 1976-1978, ProdNr should be 11215, it is the first version with E55 or series 7 filter and inbuilt hood, 2 or 3 CAM (can't see this properly), made in Canada. is it worth 260 €?
thank you for advice from a Leica newbe
1- Yes, they are optically identical
2- Serial #2837... is a 1977 issue and is indeed 11215.
If it says Summicron R - Leitz Canada, it is a 2 CAM and it is definitely worth €260 and you can easily add €100 on top of it if the lens condition is very good.
It is a very good lens which I like pretty much, especially with a light weight of 290g you can carry it in the pocket.
cyra wrote:
is it worth 260 €?
I might be biased to answer to this since Summicron 50/2 was my first alternative lens and started whole craziness on my case... 260EUR is quite cheap price these days, and I think it's worth it. However be prepared to very different rendering style than you are used with Zeiss lenses.
PS. Not sure about zoom setting used during shooting, so 200mm indicates that the shot has been taken using the long end of zoom but it might be as well 165mm and not the maximum zoom.
lithos wrote:
sebboh, please give me a feedback on using the a55 plus the 350/4.8, in particular with the focus. In another forum someone told me that focusing with this lens, a bit heavy, isn't so easy... Now I'm using a 180 telyt 3.4 multiplied x2, but I need to have more reach.
the 350 has a well damped but wonderfully smooth focus ring. turning the ring doesn't require much effort, but it can't be done with just one finger. it turns a full 360 degrees though which makes it difficult to turn fast enough to track subjects at close distances. focusing it with the a55 is fantastic for stationary subjects where you can you use the focus zoom. when you don't have time to zoom though it's about the same as any aps-c camera with an optical finder for focus ease. without using focus assist zoom moire shows up when the subject is in focus but can be misleading - i have taken a lot of slightly backfocused shots because i thought i was in a hurry and started to see moire.
this is it's back side. I never know which parts are a CAM and which are not, I see two (pic erased, since it isn't mine). It is worn, but not badly. Lenses are described to be clear although dusty.
thanks for your advice, Almass, Samuli and telyt. still pondering about wheter I should rather go for a Summilux 50. They are much more expensive though which makes me hesitant.
I like the rendering, and your images are special, Samuli.
This is a 3-cam lens. The sloped silver-colored arcs are the first and second cams, and the black stepped bit adjacent to the second (upper) cam is the third cam.
