Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 65 total)
1 2 3 … 5
  • January 29, 2014 at 10:03 am #4510
    Paratom

    Doug;5876 wrote: Good luck with the new lens, and I hope it will suit you well. I bought the 35 last year… found a nice used one at Dale… I'm pretty happy with it. But then I find it easy to adapt myself to different angles of view. Plus I have used the 45 and 55mm Pentax67 lenses, both f/4 so somewhat smaller and lighter, but manual focus and aperture of course.

    So I've been interested to hear in this thread what others feel about the uses and preferences of the different angles of view of the wide Summarits on the S/S2. Before the 45S, I had thought a 50mm would be nice… an effective 40mm could be very useful.

    I am also interested. what surprizes me is that the wider lens (35) is lighter, hass less elements and a closer focusing distance. Normally I would expect it the othr way around.
    I have the 35 but thinking to replace it with the 45, because I find 70 indoors to long sometimes and 35 slightly too wide.
    But then for outdoors 35-70 works pretty well as a 2 lens set.

    Any more imprssions from the 45 ? (I wish it was a bit smaller)

  • December 29, 2013 at 10:23 am #4460
    Paratom

    David Farkas;5796 wrote: I'd love to see a CMOS with live view and video capability, but currently there are no medium format sized CMOS sensors. Imagine the sensor performance of the M 240 with the resolution and lenses of the S…

    I am constantly fighting with the M 240 color. It just looks pinkish to me. I also tried custom profile I generated with x-rite. Slightly better but not perfect.
    I am even evaluating to go back to a M9p.
    By the way there are some cmos which looks fine to me. The A900, the K5 looks ok and the 5dIII is not that bad in regards of color.
    To me the “S” sensor still looks best in this regards. Thats why I hope Leica will stay with CCD in the S system.

  • December 17, 2013 at 10:52 pm #4453
    Paratom

    a 50 mm in smaller and lighter build size. please.

  • April 12, 2013 at 2:02 pm #3733
    Paratom

    Hi guys, any further experience with the 30mm?
    Does it do the job for you? Are you satisfied?
    Any comparisons with the 30-90 zoom?

  • February 6, 2013 at 9:34 pm #3544
    Paratom

    1 more winter shot with the S

  • January 20, 2013 at 9:40 pm #3483
    Paratom

    GMB;4118 wrote: Here it is

    This looks good, sharp (and cold).

  • January 20, 2013 at 5:52 pm #3480
    Paratom

    Georg,
    for some reason I cant open the attachment but I really would like to see the image. Tom

  • January 10, 2013 at 3:38 pm #3447
    Paratom

    any more experience with this lens. How does it work for you, how is the handling, how you get along with the speed? I am getting more interested in it.
    Thanks a lot, Tom

  • January 5, 2013 at 11:02 pm #3434
    Paratom

    andyc;4066 wrote: Hi
    I have just checked and we get the following
    30=3.5
    45=4.3
    60=4.9
    75=5.3
    90=5.6

    this is normal variation pro rata

    hope this is useful for you
    Andy:)

    Thanks a lot!

  • January 5, 2013 at 5:28 pm #3431
    Paratom

    Hi Andy. I had read the Leica info but a) they only say the f-stop at 35, 60 and 90mm, and at 90mm they say f5.0 which seems wrong? because it should be f5.6 at 90mm?

  • January 5, 2013 at 3:07 pm #3429
    Paratom

    Congrats for the new lens.
    Does the lens extend when one zooms?
    And do you mind to tell the widest f-stop at 35,50 and 70mm?
    Thanks a lot.

  • January 2, 2013 at 9:11 am #3418
    Paratom

    Josh Lehrer;4049 wrote: I will definitely be posting more ISO1600 samples as I use the camera more. To be honest, I had no trouble using the S2 at ISO1250. As long as you are careful not to under-expose the images were very usable, especially with a bit of processing. If I look through my database of S2 images, I would say 95% are at ISO320 or lower. When I work in low light, I switch to the M9 or the M Monochrom, with a Noctilux or a 35 lux.

    That is the point I am interested in – has the S improved ISO so much that one would now use the S more often even in low light vs a M9 (or a ff cmos DSLR) without sacrificing IQ?
    So for me the question comes down: Does it make sense to update my S2 to the S or should I just save the money and use my Canon DSLR when the light gets low.
    Besides low light I would see more flexibility for stopped down hand holded images with improved high ISO. I like shallow DOF but not allways. I want to choose the f-stop based on my DOF needs and not dictated by the light/camera.

  • January 1, 2013 at 9:25 pm #3415
    Paratom

    yes.please..please…more ISO 1600 images and thoughts.
    with the S2 I found 640 ok, 1250 sometimes usable, often not.
    So how much better is the new S???

  • November 4, 2012 at 8:40 pm #3153
    Paratom

    I still own the M and use it at least as much as the S.
    Its not so much about the weight. It is more about the M being so un-obstrusive and draw near to no attention.
    The other area where the M has big advantage is when the light is not bright.
    Since I dont print as often big as I had planned I even wondered sometimes if the M could be all I need.

    However the S rewards me each time when I use it.

    So as long as I can afford it I will keep both. If I had to choose just one it would be the M for me.

  • October 22, 2012 at 6:38 pm #3103
    Paratom

    I think the word “delivery date” at Leica means “eventually delivered earliest…”
    Good thing they can do optics better than scheduling.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 65 total)
1 2 3 … 5