Sorry for being late to answer your question. Yes, you can leave the 1.25× magnifier on the eyepiece when using a 35 mm lens—but it's not recommended. The 35 mm framelines with the magnifier attached will be as hard to see as the 28 mm framelines without. So it's doable but not comfortably so. For extended periods of using the 35 mm lens, yo…[Read more]
ka7197 replied to the topic Leica 21mm f/3.4 Super Elmar ASPH – Updated Design vs. Original in the forum M Lenses 10 years, 4 months ago
Josh Lehrer;2083 wrote: Notice the slightly flared-out focusing scale …
Not the focusing scale is flared out but the depth-of-field scale. The difference, so I've been told, is purely mechanical. In the original version, you could block the focusing mechanism just by pressing the rear part of the barrel (where the DOF scale is) real hard with…[Read more]
ka7197;648 wrote: [QUOTE=David Farkas;643]The detail slider under the sharpening settings acts in this way:
0 = 100 % USM
50 = 50/50 USM + deconvolution
100 = 100 % deconvolution
Oops—David, I'm afraid now it's you who's being confused. In fact, the Detail slider in ACR's and Lightroom's sharpening group of controls acts like t…[Read more]
David Farkas;643 wrote: I think you may be confusing Clarity with Detail.
Yes, I think that's what he did. His question about Clarity doesn't make any sense—until we swap Clarity for Detail.
David Farkas;643 wrote: The Detail slider under the sharpening settings acts in this way:
0 = 100 % USM
50 = 50/50 USM + d…
Pete Myers;529 wrote: … I took a look at some full size images from this lens over here:
I found it astonishing how much chromatic aberration was present in the images presented. I am not sure how to account for it …
Well—I don't have an S2, m…[Read more]
Mark Gowin;495 wrote: What do you think? Is this a flawed test or is there back focus?
It's a flawed test. There might be some back focus but you cannot be sure.
The flaw is the target being slanted. The AF sensor has some physical size so there simply is no well-defined distance to focus at when the target is not parallel to the…[Read more]
Atanabe;432 wrote: By nature, I am a cautious and do not gamble so I am only willing to “bet” 100 images that my card will not fail vs 500 images on a bigger card. My reward for using the bigger card is four less card changes saving some time but at the risk of losing all 500 images.
You're pretending the only possible reason for losing digital…[Read more]
In the long run, your average number of files lost per year due to memory card failure will be the same, no matter whether you're using a large number of small cards or a small number of large cards. With lots of small cards, the average loss per failure will be less but the number of failures will be higher … so it's six of one or half a dozen…[Read more]
The M body is a bit difficult to hold, in particular with a heavy lens … but the Thumbs Up doesn't appeal to me. I don't like the idea of putting constant torque on the hotshoe, and I also heard from users who have dented their camera's top cap where the Thumb Up's curved part touches the body.
A hand grip would change the shape and the…[Read more]
David Farkas;420 wrote: In the world of Canon or Nikon, a faster aperture lens is almost always universally a better lens than a slower lens in the same focal length. The fast lenses are the “pro” lenses and the slower lenses are the “entry-level” or “consumer” lenses.
This distinction between ‘pro' and ‘consumer' lines of lenses emerged…[Read more]
I am always astounded (in a negative way) how people pretend the Summarit-M line of lenses just didn't exist. With the limited choice of options, the poll above (or the result thereof) will be pointless and distorted.
Currently I have two 50 mm M lenses; the Summilux-M 50 mm 1:1.4 Asph and the Summarit-M 50 mm 1:2.5. If I was limited to one…[Read more]