Gary - I remember this place.. Thanks to you, I don't have to edit any of my Prague photos.. It's a luxury I tell ya!
Actually, in hindsight I shouldn't have purchased any of those insanely cheap ($.50-$1) photo passes.. Could have saved myself a couple of dollars by the end of the trip.
unoh7 - Don't you miss the fall weather now! (Well, aside from skiing, because that's always fun.)
Gary - I remember that place being really dark on the day I went. It was raining a bit just at this place. And they were real sticklers for the $.50 photo sticker.
I only had a 35mm and 75mm lens with me, and two M240 cameras. Since I was originally on this trip for work more so then playtime.
The place was packed with people trying to elbow for a shot beyond the roped off areas. And I hate crowds when I'm trying to take photos.
So what I did was turned my M240/35FLE vertical and shot three quick shots. I don't think this stuff through though, as I didn't refocus like I should have. So it ends up just looking like a wide shallow DOF shot. I really need to work on my panorama skills. Or bring a tripod with me... I have a gitzo traveler, it would be perfect, but I never bring it anywhere, since my suitcase is always at its weight limit with clothing :P
This was shot on 1.4 as it was dark. In hindsight a tripod and f/11 would have worked well in here for the three stitch. Anyway I only edited this, so Gary, you would know how much I appreciate you posting the Prague photos.. It really brings me back, without me having to do all the work. Now I know how my wife feels.. She takes all the same photos as me, but never actually exports the images from her phone or NEX memory card. Unless for instagram (BTW her account is amazingly beautiful. And mine looks like a mess, go figure).
Thanks everyone for the likes! In case anyone was wondering, one of my gigs is NFL photography. Not for the league, but a league licensee. So I was there to shoot game action, but with it being Dallas and my first time since "Jerry World" opened, I wanted to get some sideline/atmosphere shots for myself. I almost never bring the Leica to games, but decided to leave DSLR #3 at home and pack the Leica kit since I was flying down and had limited carry-on only luggage with the plan to also have a good part of yesterday to look around, which I'd rather shoot with the Leica than the DSLRs. So, M240 became camera #3 for any potential near action, which typically would be sideline celebrations following big plays, but none happened right in front of me. However, it generally worked out really nicely for the sideline atmosphere photos and will give this approach consideration for future games. In this application, I do wish the M240 was faster than 3fps.
As for the stadium and game experience: I suspect there is/was a fair amount of snickering about the stadium when it was built, about how huge it is, how it's typically 'Texas' where everything is bigger than big. But I have to say, the stadium experience was impressive and really well organized when compared to many others I've visited. One problem is always getting to and from the game with the crush of traffic, but here it was actually smooth with minimal delays (though if you don't have a parking pass, you'll pay through the nose to park in someone's lot - $80-100!). There were a lot of staff on hand to give directions, etc., and were always friendly and polite. And you can wander around a fair amount inside. Other places can be downright nasty if you leave your designated area (thinking Gillette in Foxboro, home of the Patriots), which even applies to those with media credentials (if you dare attempt to leave the field area). And the jumbo-tron is insanely massive, to the point that it's difficult not to watch it instead of the game, which does make one wonder about spending hundreds of dollars for a ticket if mostly to watch the big screen. The last time I was at a game in Dallas, back about 10 years ago, I have to admit that I remember the cheerleaders being more risqué. They now seem to have become more wholesome and family friendly.
Michael - thanks for the further explanation of your thoughts about the S system. You're making a compelling argument. I pretty much ignored it because of a couple factors: price and my recollection of playing with files from it when it first launched. At that time I remember being unimpressed with anything higher than ISO 160.
chrislee: regarding your question, I definitely think you need to try the system for yourself. There are significant differences and while Leica always loses when making 'spec-sheet' comparisons, there is something that comes through in the images that one could never quantify based on spec sheet stats. Leica M probably isn't a rational experience when it comes to value/performance for the dollar.
Adam, great B&W set of your wife!
Back to NYC Halloween somewhere in the subway system with the M240 and 21 Lux:
Does anyone remember a while back when we were talking about the 21SEM and how it has two barrel designs. The original one that Leica released and then recalled. And the one that we all have and use today?
Well I am now in possession of both the original design, and the "updated" design. I wouldn't assume there would be any optical differences. But I love the stiffness of the focusing. It feels like a much more solid lens (even thought the current 21SEM isn't by any means flimsy).
I remember... isn't the newer design thicker around the lens mount area? I don't remember hearing anything about a change to the optics, so it should be the same. You should keep the original version... maybe it has some collector's value? Any chance of a side by side photo to see the differences again?
Zhangyue and Ron. I appreciate that I'm asking a biased group of astonishing photographers. But that's exactly why I asked my question here straight from the horses mouth so to speak. But all I need to do is look at the shots at the game, beach and those beautiful model images.. "Wow". The colors. The resolution. The DR. And the 'feeling invoked'. I will definitely find a Leica dealer here in Chicago somewhere after the holidays. I'm visiting Portland OR for Xmas with a friends borrowed Nex5 with an EOS adapter that I'm going to play around with for fun. I'll be comparing it to my 5D with my Leica 90mm.
Thanks again guys for encouraging me to check a M out.
Chris
Chris, good luck with your decision, either way. You will find a better tool to suit you better. Buying Leica used may not as expensive as you think compare to buy new Sony. Put great Zeiss lens, you can get top class results and get you time to be familiar with the system, if it is not for you, just sold it without loss much other than time
The S camera I bought also have sensor corrosion problem. but I was take care of by Leica store and Leica NJ that they promise sent me loan unit along with return shipping label during the time mine with them. They promise have it fully clean and replace sensor along with anything need to be replaced/CLAed. A great service. though I bought mine with one year warranty at the time of buying.
At the same time, I keep shooting it before the loan unit arrive, at f2.5 I don't see the spots anyway. I totally fall in love with the system. I complain Nikon's weight a lot but not as much with Leica I guess we human are such subjective creature that tolerant people/stuff we love, even their draw back. The viewfinder makes up for everything. The byproduct/good thing is I no longer complain D810 with 14-24G weight anymore. Haha .
Ron, I find ISO 640 from S is very clean, I almost never bother to turn it down shooting around. well, I can't, give its f2.5 and handhold problem I have. but ISO1250 seems like a cliff drop. Don't know why.
ISO640 70 WO
Well, run out of M pictures. I am cleaning my hard disk and find there are a lot images I have n't touched.
Thank you Zhangyue, and you read my mind what I was thinking. A new Sony A7ii or a used M8, though I wanted a FF camera really. Plus, after spending the day reading much on Ken Rockwell's great Leica articles, I'm very disappointed in Kens article comparing the A7 to the 5D3 to the M240. Wow! So, not good! This also corresponds with your A experience too. Kind of puts a damper on my expectations.
I also sadly learned that my R lenses won't work. (But at the very least, I'll prob make money selling them if I go the M route) And,the funds from the 90 APO and 28mm PC SA would go a long way. Yet I remain skeptical of me producing the quality I see here with a rangefinder and my crap vision and tremors. But I found a Leica dealer with used M8 &9s that I can check out after the holidays.
Ron - You're going to laugh, but after quite a bit of research I've realised something. I've had the "rare" barrel design all along. The new 21 that came into my possession is actually the "current" barrel design. .. I guess it's build quality seems better because it's newer? It does have a nicer stiffness to it, which is the opposite of what the old design was sent in for. I'm really confused now as I thought I had originally had the new design. My OCD is driving me crazy. But you're right, the optics are the same.
Anyway, the reason I picked up a new 21SEM was because my old one is at Leica.. And I made a trade with someone where incidentally I acquired this one.. Or else I wouldn't have bothered getting a second one. Since I only use the 21SEM on trips I could have done without the second one, since my first copy should come back from Leica in a few weeks.
@ Adam read the comments in this post: two SEM 21 Versions
the new one is fat and heavier with less stiff focus, supposedly. Mine is new one. If I did not have one I'd ask you to send me your extra
I'm in an interesting little battle right now over at RFF (as usual) regarding natural lens oxidation and uncoated Zeiss jena 50/1.5 from 1937, specifically: DSC02414 by unoh7, on Flickr
Which was repaired by the famous Henry Scherer, who reported:
"Hello Charlie,
I have an opening while waiting for paint to cure while working on a Contax III and so have moved forward with your lens and it is completely disassembled. It is very dirty but very fine. The lens elements are in perfect condition and so my guess is it's going to be a 10 when its done. It's distinguished by very fine surface oxidation of the front and rear lens elements. This shows it's never been cleaned. Whoever owned it previously cared for it very much. This surface oxidation acts like coating and significantly improves the lens so if I were you I'd invest in a UV filter and would never clean this lens. This surface oxidation is very rare and highly desirable."
I was relating this to another guy at RFF when a third guy chimed in implying it's all a big myth
anyway looking to support the idea I found this image I'd shot this fall with the lens at f/9.5ish: L1023014 by unoh7, on Flickr
This is unedited, and I thought it was pretty good for a 75 year old lens, which has never seen a drop of lens cleaner
Anyone with thoughts on the subject please chime in
uhoh7 - Yes last night while doing research I stumbled upon that photo you posted. I realised then that my first 21SEM (the one at Leica) is the "rare" design. Funny thing is, it's actually LOOSE which is why I sent it in, not stiff
So when I got this new 21SEM, I thought it was the "rare" design, as I've not seen it before. It was "weird" to me. AND it's focusing is quite stiff (a good stiff).. So I when I originally posted above, I had thought that I had JUST got the "rare" design... When in fact, I've had it all along.
Anyway, it's at Leica now, so who knows. I heard on the forums that sometimes they switch out the part, and sometimes they don't. Apparently it's just the metal ring near the bottom of the lens.
-------
As for your question, I'm not sure if I understand. But I can tell you something strange. I had a REALLY old lens that I didn't use for 15 years. And it' wasn't properly stored. I went to fetch it one day from my family's storage, and it was cloudy (not fungus or haze) but like a film of waxy milky dust on the front of the lens (but not just dust). I cleaned it off with a cleaning cloth and it was super shinny and the coating was fine. For some reason the internal lenses didn't have a problem at all (back element had a bit of a problem, but much less so, maybe due to the back cap being on), and it worked super. BTW there was no filter or cap on the front of the lens.. Left bare.
I don't have the lens with me, but if I recall, it's a russian lens.. Some weird Leica copy.
Thank you everyone for the nice comments and likes. Really enjoying seeing everyone's work here. Thought I'd share one I captured this evening over the Caribbean on my way to Los Angeles.
Leica M-E, Leica Summilux-M 35mm ASPH. (f1.4, 1/30, ISO 160)
Ricardo is that image w/the MM, really digging the tones
Edward or anybody here ever tried the new Zeiss 35mm 1.4 Distagon T* ZM by chance? I am looking at this lens carefully has a alternative to the 35 asph-fle for my MM, mainly after character of the lens. The 35 asph-fle was a great lens, but def. not my preference for character / rendering
.
