Old 06-08-2017   #1521
analoged
Registered User
 
analoged's Avatar
 
analoged is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: HNL/TYO
Posts: 197
A couple from my new to me Epson R-D1 and trusty late German 35 Lux Pre Asph...



__________________
M6-Lux 35 Pre Asph
SL2-Lux 50
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2017   #1522
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
More from Moreton Island. Rouse Battery, a WW2 set high in the sand dunes.
Both M6, HP5, R09, yellow filter.



__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1523
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
M4, Foma 400 at 250 in R09.



Afternoon (winter) sun under the house.

Winter isn't really winter here. Still warm but just no storms...
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1524
agoglanian
Reconnected.
 
agoglanian's Avatar
 
agoglanian is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Age: 31
Posts: 819
Dang it. Every time I think I'm going to sell the 35 Summilux I process some film and look at the results and fall in love with it again. It's just one of those lenses that has a really special rendering aesthetic, but I feel like I've been struggling with the focal length.

All on the same roll of Tri-X, M-A and 35 Summilux Pre-Asph

Jurassic Park. by Abram Goglanian, on Flickr

Hay. by Abram Goglanian, on Flickr

Another please. by Abram Goglanian, on Flickr

Untitled. by Abram Goglanian, on Flickr
__________________
- Abram

M-A | M240 | F | G2 | GR

Instagram. | Website.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1525
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Love that last one Abram!
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1526
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
I compared the v1 and the v2. Same lens or not?

Leica M2, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v1, 400-2TMY:



Leica M2, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v2, 400-2TMY:



Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1527
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Erik,
The only difference I can see is that there's a different lens in each picture, and that there was a little less light on the second shot.
Maybe you see more, maybe this scene isn't going to show off their differences, maybe there are no differences?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-25-2017   #1528
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
Erik,
The only difference I can see is that there's a different lens in each picture,
Well, that is what it is all about. They are different lenses. When you don't see that ... Look at the highlights on the sugarpot on the left, for instance. The lenses draw them completely different. However, many people think those lenses are the same.
The distribution of the light over the whole frame is completely different too. See the other thread on the Summilux 35mm pre-asph.

The light was at both shots the same, btw.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-01-2017   #1529
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Two of "Weary" Dunlop. Taken on the same day, 1st in the morning sun, and the second as an afternoon storm approaches.
Both Portra 160 @ 125, developed with the Unicolor kit. M4.



__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-03-2017   #1530
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Two more from my first C41 developing batch. Taking a while to scan...

Again Portra 160 at 125, M4.

Entering NGV



And this one of jmilkins at the Eggleston exhibit in NGV.



I'm starting to enjoy this whole colour photography thing
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2017   #1531
music_healing
Registered User
 
music_healing is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 871
Three

Three .. by William Jusuf, on Flickr

Summilux 35 Pre ASPH with Rollei RPX400

Sincerely
William Jusuf
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #1532
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
M4 Foma 400 at 250 in R09



A spider caught in the flare
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #1533
biakalt
Long Tran
 
biakalt's Avatar
 
biakalt is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 118
Hi all,

Great images as always.

Is there anyone had tried this lens (mine is v2) with the M10? I've read a while ago that the lens bayonet doesn't work properly so it can't focus to infinity. Is that right? Thank you

Cheers
__________________

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #1534
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by biakalt View Post
Hi all,

Great images as always.

Is there anyone had tried this lens (mine is v2) with the M10? I've read a while ago that the lens bayonet doesn't work properly so it can't focus to infinity. Is that right? Thank you

Cheers
Some of the light baffle needs to be removed to mount on the M8(9?) but I have no idea about the M10 sorry. You'll likely get an answer in the M10 forum with a new thread.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #1535
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
M4 Foma 400 at 250 R09



Runners
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #1536
giulio stucchi
Registered User
 
giulio stucchi's Avatar
 
giulio stucchi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Bruxelles
Age: 40
Posts: 690
m2, summilux 35 v2, tri-x 400, perceptol






Giulio
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #1537
helenhill
Beauty in Shadow & Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is online now
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 4,999
Pick a boo or Counting while You Run and Hide Guillo

Very Sweeeet !
__________________
Flickr.

A Lover of Leica M's...
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #1538
damonsong
Registered User
 
damonsong is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Well, that is what it is all about. They are different lenses. When you don't see that ... Look at the highlights on the sugarpot on the left, for instance. The lenses draw them completely different. However, many people think those lenses are the same.
The distribution of the light over the whole frame is completely different too. See the other thread on the Summilux 35mm pre-asph.

The light was at both shots the same, btw.

Erik.
May I ask which version do you prefer?

Thanks
__________________
leica_dad
YouTube
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #1539
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by damonsong View Post
May I ask which version do you prefer?
Very much the v1. If I find the time this evening I will scan the negatives again without altering the histogram, so the histogram will then be the same for both pictures. The differences will be much more obvious.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #1540
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
Leica M2, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v1 & v2, 400-2TMY, Perceptol.

Both pictures with the same histogram.

Erik.

v1:



v2:

  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1541
damonsong
Registered User
 
damonsong is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Leica M2, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v1 & v2, 400-2TMY, Perceptol.

Both pictures with the same histogram.

Erik.

v1:



v2:

Thanks!

Now with the new scan I can tell that V1 definitely has better/more uniform foreground bokeh, background is a little harder to tell.
__________________
leica_dad
YouTube
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1542
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by damonsong View Post
Thanks!

Now with the new scan I can tell that V1 definitely has better/more uniform foreground bokeh, background is a little harder to tell.
I don't think that's correct. The v1 image is focused further into the frame than the v2, so it gives the appearance of more uniform/better foreground bokeh but in reality it's not. For example, the front of the tray is sharp in the v2 image and not in the v1 image. Look to the side of the tray and it becomes clear.

I think Erik may have a front focusing v2, or a back focusing v1. Either way, the focus point is not the same and apart form that, I see no difference except for conformation bias that the more expensive/rare item is better.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1543
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
I like the v1 better because of the more even illumination of the frame. The v2 has a brighter center, but darker corners. Also a bit more contrast in the center of the image.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1544
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
This shot, slightly stopped down, shows the typical tonality of the v1. Same spot but many years ago.

Leica M3, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v1, Tmax400.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1545
bobbyrab
Registered User
 
bobbyrab is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 671
I definitely prefer V1, much calmer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1546
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I see no difference except for conformation bias that the more expensive/rare item is better.
Personally I see a lot of differences. It is my goal to show that those are different lenses, not to show wich one is better. To make a decision wich one is better is a very subjective matter. It is like choosing between a Stradivarius and an Amati.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1547
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Personally I see a lot of differences. It is my goal to show that those are different lenses, not to show wich one is better. To make a decision wich one is better is a very subjective matter. It is like choosing between a Stradivarius and an Amati.

Erik.
I must be too fine dear to tell the difference, but I just don't see them as different lenses.

Either way, you make excellent shots with the v1 and every other lens Erik, nothing seems to hold you back.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1548
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
Thank you, Michael, here is a shot with the v2 at f/2.8 of f/4. The very strange behavior of the dept of field (strangely curved) made me stop using the lens. The v1 behaves much more "normal".

Leica MP, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v2, Tmax400, Perceptol.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1549
MikeL
Go Fish
 
MikeL's Avatar
 
MikeL is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
I like the v1 better because of the more even illumination of the frame. The v2 has a brighter center, but darker corners. Also a bit more contrast in the center of the image.

Erik.
It's interesting we see different things. To my eyes, your photos show darker corners in he v1.

And as stated above in the thread, I haven't had curvature in the field with multiple v2 copies nor has anyone elses that I've seen.

I think you might find Erik that a CLA of your v2 might resolve it.

The slightly lower contrast of the v1 I briefly had was nice, but the flare problems relative to the v2 relegates the v1 to collector fun for me. Sold my v1 quick.
  Reply With Quote

Old 5 Days Ago   #1550
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,006
[quote=MikeL;2756178
And as stated above in the thread, I haven't had curvature in the field with multiple v2 copies nor has anyone elses that I've seen.

[/quote]

Thank you, Mike. My v2 is in like new condition, clear as a bell, so a cla will not help much.

I simply think it is a dog. That's why it wasn't used.

My v1's (I have two of them) are both recently serviced.

This is a shot with a v1, excellent quality IMO.

Leica M5, Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v1, 400-2TMY, Perceptol.

Best,

Erik.

  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 13:04.


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.