Oh, why do I get GAS?

[Vickko]

....maybe because I'm more "pack rat" than "photographer".

The recent threads on the 21mm f3.4 Super Angulon M are driving me nuts.

...V

[Benjamin Marks]

Sherry Krauter's opinion is that guys do this instead of chasing women. Regardless of her theory, looking at the forum, you are not alone, clearly.

Ben Marks, fellow pack-rat, but also an actual picture taker.

[Zathros]

Do you eat a lot of beans and sauerkraut or drink lots of Stroh's beer?

[Steve M.]

Going to 6x6 really helped me w/ this, especially since a lot of the cameras like folders and TLR's are fixed lens cameras. No lens coveting w/ them, because as we say in the drag racing world, you gotta run what you brung. And after a while you go through the available 6x6 cameras (they're essentially all old, big, heavy and pretty cheap) and you find one or two that really do it for you image wise. At that point you realize that all the gear changing in the world isn't going to improve your image quality.

When you aren't out constantly doing lens testing and comparing shots from different setups, photography becomes something totally different.

[tbarker13]

Funny. I feel the same way about the 21/3.4. Of course, I had one once and sold it. Now I want another one.
It really is the danger of these forums. Great place to learn. But also a great place to get obsessed over all the toys that are out there.

[Tom A]

Vic, you need a 21f3.4! This is the only way to cure the GAS. Be warned, it is also one of the nicest lenses you can find and use. If there ever was a lens with a distinct signature - the 21 SA is it. Nice edge drop and razor sharp in the corners.
I have multiple 21's, including some of the Zeiss 21's and they are great. Sharp, nice contrast, no flare etc - but I always keep the 21S-A handy. Very 60's look with bl/w - and considering that it was Jean Loup Sieff's favorite wide-angle - that's good enough for me.

[maddoc]

Funny. I feel the same way about the 21/3.4. Of course, I had one once and sold it. Now I want another one.


... NEVER sell a 21/3.4 ... ;)

[PaulW128]

Tom;

Your description sounds so good, now I want an 21 f3.4 and I don't even own a body to put it on!!!

Paul

[John Lawrence]

Sherry Krauter's opinion is that guys do this instead of chasing women.


My cameras and lenses have never let me down ....


John

[bobkonos]

GAS is fine, there are far more worse afflictions. I take comfort now in that I am truly done, thanks in part to a long GAS attack the past few years. But my larder is full of great cameras and lenses, accessories, and literature (I do have the collector gene after all). My shelf queens give me as much delight as my daily users. And, I am lucky to know Tom A. who has way more gear than I will ever have so I do not feel too bloated at all. Add to that the core principle: GAS should be accompanied, preferably prior to it, by GAP: Gear Attrition Process; in other words, sell some gear to get some gear. Anyway, enjoy it all, guilt-free.

[Vickko]

GAP?

And risk the danger of selling the wrong gear?? :-)

One lesson that I've learned is never to sell Leica gear. It is always more expensive buying it the second time.


....Vick

[oftheherd]

Tom;

Your description sounds so good, now I want an 21 f3.4 and I don't even own a body to put it on!!!

Paul

Yeah, me too! And I can't afford either the lens or the camera. :( :bang:

GAP?

And risk the danger of selling the wrong gear?? :-)

One lesson that I've learned is never to sell Leica gear. It is always more expensive buying it the second time.


....Vick

I also don't like to get rid of gear - why would I buy it in the first place if I didn't want it? Also, now I have to be concerned with another syndrome to learn and fear: GAP!! :eek: :eek:

[tbarker13]

Life would be much easier (in the "never sell" department) if not for the fact that I have a couple other hobbies/passions to feed as well.
My general rule is that I've gone 6 months without using a lens, that means I probably don't need it any more.

My sale of a 21 SA was sort of impulsive. Increasingly, I think it would make an excellent companion for my 35 pre-asph lux. Kind of hte 28-50 combo on the M8.

[Tom A]

I can easily get rid of a camera body (well, ok - not M2's) - but lenses tend to stay with me and multiply. Of course, there is the excuse of "sample variations" (not really valid as such, but a good excuse). Occasionally I look at the drawers packed with lenses and say to myself"Oh, I should get rid of some of these" - but I quickly come to my senses and resist.
I tend to put together "packages" of a brand, Leica's has to have a 21/28/35/50 kit as do Nikon's ( and for some reason, currently Canon's!). Of course, we are now blessed with VC/Zeiss lenses, both for M's and Nikon's - so one reason is to "compare" the original with the new. Hey, any excuse is a good excuse.
It is reasonably harmless as an addiction - and it does allow the "taking of pictures" as a end result.
Of course, all we really need is a M2 and a 35 and a bag full of Tri X. However, which 35 and which M2 (sample variations again!).

[Brian Sweeney]

I have so many lenses- I'm saturated. Now it's lens adapters and adapting lenses.

Just picked up an F-Mount to M-Mount adapter. I want to use my Nikkor 24/2.8 on the M8.

And then there is the u4/3rds selection of adapters... I think my EP2 has about 200 lenses that it can use right about now...

[Dave Wilkinson]

This thread makes me blush and think of my other form of gas!...pipes (how about you Tom?)....I'm just back from Turkey with two more meerschaums - and there are now twenty five pipes in my cabinet! :o.....someone beat this - and make me feel better! :p
Dave.

[Tom A]

Dave. I only have about 5 pipes (3 Petersen and two custom carved ones by Alex Shishin). One of my Petersen is actually a meerschaum).

[steveyork]

I think some of it is that we want to experience new and different experience, not vicariously, but directly. I can read, for example, what Tom A. says about an S2 or an M2, but until I get one and use it for myself, I don't fully understand.

When it comes to equipment, a lot of photography is trial and error. You need to use it to see if it works for you. If it does, great, but if it doesn't pass it on. If you lose money on the deal, treat it as a rental fee.

The one item I hate about GAS is that it can chew up a lot of your free time with preoccupation. And time is important and thinking about camera stuff isn't. So just give in. Get it. Use it. If you like it keep it. If you don't then pass it on.

I've gone through 1.5 years of bad GAS where I've built up a Leicaflex system for several trips, and then sold most of it afte the trips were over. And then I regrew -- and in some respects overgrew -- my rangefinder system. I'm now pruning what I don't use.

The fact of the matter is that you can sit around and think about what you want/need, but until you get it in your hands and use it, you don't know if it works for you.

And another little rule I have for GAS is that if I don't use something in 6-9 months, then pass it on to someone who will.

I suspect it's part of an addictive psychology we have, but I can think of a lot worse addictions.

[Keith]

This thread makes me blush and think of my other form of gas!...pipes (how about you Tom?)....I'm just back from Turkey with two more meerschaums - and there are now twenty five pipes in my cabinet! :o.....someone beat this - and make me feel better! :p
Dave.


A good friend of mine has a fairly large collection of padlocks ... a couple of hundred of them proudly on display in a glass cabinet as you walk through his front door!

[rbiemer]

A good friend of mine has a fairly large collection of padlocks ... a couple of hundred of them proudly on display in a glass cabinet as you walk through his front door!

Is the cabinet locked?
Rob

[Keith]

Is the cabinet locked?
Rob


I've never noticed! :p

[Ronald M]

You get GAS from beans. The cure is don`t eat them.

If you feed the beast, you end up with a closet full of gear you can`t use. So you sell it at a loss and get sellers remorse or you keep it and build storage cabinets.

As far as 21 3.4, it was the worst Leica lens I ever owned. I sold it within 3 months and got a new pre ASPH 21 that just came out and I still have it. Think it cost $650.

All true wide angles vignette badly based on cosine 4th law. It does not clen up to f16.

[HenningW]

As far as 21 3.4, it was the worst Leica lens I ever owned. I sold it within 3 months and got a new pre ASPH 21 that just came out and I still have it. Think it cost $650.

All true wide angles vignette badly based on cosine 4th law. It does not clen up to f16.

I'm assuming here that what you refer to as 'true' wideangles are pure symmetrical wideangles. In that case, yes. The SA is very close to that, but even it doesn't follow the cos4th rule, vignetting much less than could be expected.

The pre-ASPH Elmarit did not vignette as much as the SA and of course you can TTL meter with it, but in every other respect it did not match up to the SA. As soon as the ASPH came out, I got rid of the non-ASPH, but kept the SA throughout. The SA I will not part with, but the pre-ASPH Elmarit is the one Leica lens I feel no regret selling.

Henning

[blimey]

lens only break your wallet. women breaks both your heart and wallet.