how do you carry your gear? I mean, what bag are you using?
regards
nothing fancy, but likely two of them (one for 35 mm film/digital, one for MF)...this is when 'on the go'... if the lenses are small enough then in the pocket of my jacket
My first impression on the field is that is quite well made, no wobble at all both on the lens and the camera side of the adapter, but at the same time it screws in quite smoothly. The tripod mount, even if looked a bit flimsy to my at first impact, is made of solid metal like the rest of the adapter and seemed to be quite stable on the tripod. Of course it cannot rotate, so for vertical orientation one must use the tripod head or some sort of DYI l-bracket. For a quarter of the price of the Leitax, it seems a very decent alternative to me (even if of course not as good)
Sadly turned out my exemplary, which was bought less than a year ago with a bit of separation on one side, has now developed it already on almost half of the rear element, so it's barely usable now..
Ok, took the bet at discount, enjoyed it while it lasted and now guess it will just sit there accumulating dust.. RIP
So my advice is again to totally stay away from "separated" exemplaries, even if it seems quite little at the beginning, it can develop FAST and totally screw up the lens.
Tirpitz666 wrote:
Sadly turned out my exemplary, which was bought less than a year ago with a bit of separation on one side, has now developed it already on almost half of the rear element, so it's barely usable now..
Ok, took the bet at discount, enjoyed it while it lasted and now guess it will just sit there accumulating dust.. RIP
So my advice is again to totally stay away from "separated" exemplaries, even if it seems quite little at the beginning, it can develop FAST and totally screw up the lens.
What did this entail, in terms of communication/logistics and expense?
I'd love a 100-300, but I've shied away from even the clean (expensive!) examples because I thought that, if the problem cropped up, it was a terminal disease.
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
No, the Contax is considerably larger and heavier than the Voigtlander 180...
CV180 f4 is 485 gm 66mm X 59mm 49mm filter!! MFD 1.2m Max mag 1:4 The only one in that range lighter is the Zuiko 200 F5.
Zuiko 200 f5 MC: 380gm 105mm X 62mm 49mm filter MFD 2.5m Max mag
about 1:10
The Zuiko 200/5 is longer though and difficult to find in MC version. The CV is nice and sharp wide open and excels for macro with or w/o a tad of extension. The bokeh is generally very good but can get nervous with background too close. I don't recall it excelling at infinity but is still very good. Perhaps the Contax zoom is better there but can't beat the size of the CV.
That's quite interesting thanks!
As already asked, how did the whole process work? I imagine you had to send your lens all the way to Japan, what was the final cost of the entire venture, repair+shipping back and forth? Did you send the entire lens or the rear element only as he is telling me? Not sure I'll be able to disassembly it myself and then putting it back together, shouldn't it be professionally re-aligned once fixed?
Looking at the pics it totally seems to me that mine has the same problem, but the laboratory to which I brought the lens told me that for them is not lens separation but simply "lens internal hazing that can be removed with some special treatment", so I left the lens with them even if I'm quite skeptical that they are right, considering that this is a well known issue with this lens. Anyway, for now I've not paid anything, so if they fail to fix it, worst case I can go your route, if the price is sensible enough vs buying a new good copy...
Tirpitz666 wrote:
That's quite interesting thanks!
As already asked, how did the whole process work? I imagine you had to send your lens all the way to Japan, what was the final cost of the entire venture, repair+shipping back and forth? Did you send the entire lens or the rear element only as he is telling me? Not sure I'll be able to disassembly it myself and then putting it back together, shouldn't it be professionally re-aligned once fixed?
Looking at the pics it totally seems to me that mine has the same problem, but the laboratory to which I brought the lens told me that for them is not lens separation but simply "lens internal hazing that can be removed with some special treatment", so I left the lens with them even if I'm quite skeptical that they are right, considering that this is a well known issue with this lens. Anyway, for now I've not paid anything, so if they fail to fix it, worst case I can go your route, if the price is sensible enough vs buying a new good copy...
He repaired one for me as well. He's in Taiwan. Cost is $150 + shipping to there, and ~ $40 return shipping. Work is excellent and turnaround was less than half the time I was quoted. YMMV on that last part.
So, if you paid less than $700, IMO you're still in the ball park for a guaranteed excellent copy w/o haze, plus it will likely be trouble-free for years.
