Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Being a Photographer > Technique: How To Shoot It

Technique: How To Shoot It Ask questions about how to take pics, as well as share your own favorite shooting tips.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Indoors: 1.4 vs 1.7 on M2
Old 10-29-2015   #1
jkjod
Registered User
 
jkjod's Avatar
 
jkjod is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Age: 32
Posts: 233
Indoors: 1.4 vs 1.7 on M2

So I think I already know the answer to this, but my novice mind is having a hard time convincing myself that its true.

I have the ZM 35/1.4 and its a fantastic lens, I have really only one complaint - its big. I'm coming from the 35 C Biogon and Voigt 35/1.4 Nokton. Both small lenses. The handling of these smaller lenses is preferable. I have been looking into the Voigt 35/1.7 Ultron as its quite a bit smaller than the ZM 35/1.4 with very good performance. I'm curious if I will lose a whole lot with the half stop - I shoot a lot of family photos indoors using 200-400 speed film so I don't really want my shutter speeds getting too low.

Someone with more experience please help me out here. Will the half stop between 1.4 and 1.7 be a big deal?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #2
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 885
With high-speed film and sensitive sensors, it is completely irrelevant.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #3
bluesun267
Registered User
 
bluesun267's Avatar
 
bluesun267 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 81
This is the LTM Ultron, correct? IIRC that model only focuses to 1m which was a deal breaker for me. I use those extra 8 inches of close focus a lot.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #4
jkjod
Registered User
 
jkjod's Avatar
 
jkjod is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Age: 32
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesun267 View Post
This is the LTM Ultron, correct? IIRC that model only focuses to 1m which was a deal breaker for me. I use those extra 8 inches of close focus a lot.
I'm speaking of the new M-Mount version.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #5
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,756
If it is family, then 1.4 and 1.7 won't give you enough DOF.
HP5+ is pushable to 1200 without issues under indoors home's lights.
It gives me the enough DOF at f4-f5.6.
I'm using 24 f4 with it and speed is enough to avoid the blur. The lens is very small and fun for family pictures because on 35mm I'm taking it as from outside. At 25mm I'm in the action. Like my wife, two kids and me right next to them in relatively small bathroom.

Not going to show those kind of pictures here , but here is another at 25 f4 @1200 in not so bright indoors.

Those two were moving fast. I took it at 1/500, if I'm not mistaking.

  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #6
jkjod
Registered User
 
jkjod's Avatar
 
jkjod is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Age: 32
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
If it is family, then 1.4 and 1.7 won't give you enough DOF.
HP5+ is pushable to 1200 without issues under indoors home's lights.
It gives me the enough DOF at f4-f5.6.
I'm using 24 f4 with it and speed is enough to avoid the blur. The lens is very small and fun for family pictures because on 35mm I'm taking it as from outside. At 25mm I'm in the action. Like my wife, two kids and me right next to them in relatively small bathroom.

Not going to show those kind of pictures here , but here is another at 25 f4 @1200 in not so bright indoors.

Those two were moving fast. I took it at 1/500, if I'm not mistaking.
Thanks for the input - I'm actually fine with the DOF with the 35/1.4. Its not that I'm unhappy with the results I'm getting. I'm curious if the change from 1.4 to 1.7 will effect the shutter speeds I will be using (I had a feeling no).
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #7
bluesun267
Registered User
 
bluesun267's Avatar
 
bluesun267 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkjod View Post
I'm speaking of the new M-Mount version.
Shows how behind the times I am.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #8
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 4,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkjod View Post
Will the half stop between 1.4 and 1.7 be a big deal?
No. You may see 1/4 stop of a difference, if that, and it will only show on a camera that has an electronic stepless shutter i.e. one that can give in between values eg Minolta CLE where 1/60 and /125 may be lit at the same time indicating a value in between.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #9
jkjod
Registered User
 
jkjod's Avatar
 
jkjod is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Age: 32
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
No. You may see 1/4 stop of a difference, if that, and it will only show on a camera that has an electronic stepless shutter i.e. one that can give in between values eg Minolta CLE where 1/60 and /125 may be lit at the same time indicating a value in between.
Thanks, this is what I was kind of thinking. I was using a light meter on my iPhone and looking at the difference between 1.4 and 1.7 and it was changing a full shutter speed stop for the difference in apertures which is what was throwing me for a loop. I have it set to full stops though to match my M2. I know it will make zero difference on a digital body, but was curious if the half stop would make a difference on film (don't want to underexpose, especially indoors).
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #10
Sonny Sichtstein
Mike in Sacramento
 
Sonny Sichtstein's Avatar
 
Sonny Sichtstein is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Age: 59
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkjod View Post
Thanks, this is what I was kind of thinking. I was using a light meter on my iPhone and looking at the difference between 1.4 and 1.7 and it was changing a full shutter speed stop for the difference in apertures which is what was throwing me for a loop. I have it set to full stops though to match my M2. I know it will make zero difference on a digital body, but was curious if the half stop would make a difference on film (don't want to underexpose, especially indoors).
I've heard (and believe) the M2 shutter, when adjusted and operating properly, is accurate to within 1/3 stop.

And I've read (and believe) that two photographers metering the same scene can come up with EV that are 1 full stop apart.

And I heard (and believe) that black and white films typically (or at least commonly) have exposure latitude of a couple stops over and under.

1/3 stop... not gonna matter.

Unless of course all these variables stack up against you... Nah!

-mike
__________________
M8 | M2 bp | M2 | IIIf RDST bp | IIIc
Biogon T* 35/2 | Summitar 50/2 | Elmar 50/3.5 | Fed 50/3.5 | Color Skopar 25/4
Rolleiflex 3.5 MX-EVS | Calumet C400 4x5, Caltar-S II 150/5.6 | Kiev 88, 80/2.8 Arsat | Olympus E420 w/ 14-42/3.5-5.6
Pacific Image PrimeFilm XE scanner | Epson V600 scanner | Epson P600 printer

me on 500px
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #11
rscheffler
Registered User
 
rscheffler is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 459
I shoot the new 35/1.7 on the M240. When I first got it, I did the usual aperture range tests to determine performance in a variety of conditions. Looking through some of these images again, what jumps out at me is that the lens is probably more realistically an f/2 effective aperture, except that the very central area of the image does gain about 1/3 or so of a stop when at f/1.7. In other words, most of the image outside the very center is the same exposure at f/1.7 and f/2 (of course at the same shutter speed).

I don't have the ZM35/1.4, so can't comment on how much better, if at all, it is in this respect.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #12
jkjod
Registered User
 
jkjod's Avatar
 
jkjod is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Age: 32
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by rscheffler View Post
I shoot the new 35/1.7 on the M240. When I first got it, I did the usual aperture range tests to determine performance in a variety of conditions. Looking through some of these images again, what jumps out at me is that the lens is probably more realistically an f/2 effective aperture, except that the very central area of the image does gain about 1/3 or so of a stop when at f/1.7. In other words, most of the image outside the very center is the same exposure at f/1.7 and f/2 (of course at the same shutter speed).

I don't have the ZM35/1.4, so can't comment on how much better, if at all, it is in this respect.
Thanks for this. I can see this having a bigger impact on film compared to your M240. Maybe I should just suck it up and just keep shooting. Someday maybe I'll be able to afford the FLE for its smaller size, but for now I should just be happy with what I have. I'm lucky enough to have the M2 and ZM 35, that's for sure.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2015   #13
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkjod View Post
Someday maybe I'll be able to afford the FLE for its smaller size, but for now I should just be happy with what I have.
The ZM 35/1.4 is better at F/1.4 (less vignetting, sharper, no focus shift - the FLE focus shifts, albeit less than the pre-FLE, whereas the ZM 35/1.4 doesn't), and it still has an edge at F/2. So you already have the best M-mount 35mm F1.4 lens and IMO its not worth the extra outlay to buy an FLE.

I bought a ZM 35/1.4 a few months ago to try out, then sold it. But ended up buying another one recently and am now looking to offload my FLE. The ZM is so good that I just don't see the point in tying up so much cash in the FLE anymore. I think you'd see a noticeable performance difference between the ZM and Ultron wide open. Once you get used to the ZM there's no going back

If the size is the only complaint, maybe buy a smaller 35mm lens to use when you don't need the speed?
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-30-2015   #14
ktmrider
Registered User
 
ktmrider is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: el paso, texas
Age: 64
Posts: 886
If you are really looking for the ultimate speed out of a 35mm focal length, do not forget the 35f1.2 Nokton. Now it is big but a great lens and can be found used for $800.

I have one as well as a 35f2.8 C-Biogon which may be the sharpest 35mm made. The 35f2.5 which Voightlander makes is another excellent small lens. Teamed with the 35f1.4 Zeiss it would be a killer combo and much smaller then the 35f1.7 (assuming you would not mind 2 35's).

By the way, the M2 is my favorite Leica film body and I have two identical button rewind bodies from 1959. Am traveling now with the M9 but wish I had brought an M2 as well or even instead of.

I personally think most Leica lenses are way overpriced these days. Of course, the ones I own have appreciated. However, the great thing about the M system is lenses from the 1950's or earlier can still be used. And of course thousands of great images were taken (and are being taken) with these older lenses.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:41.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.