[24 / 7 / ?]
I've never known what to think about this lens..
A few years ago, I found someone's Leica IIIF setup at my local antique/estate sale shop. I assume the guy died. He was a pilot, as I found some photos of him and his lady from the war near the camera, and a slip stating that he bought the set while based in Japan, presumably. I wound up with an old IIIF body (with a bad curtain), a few lenses that were either bad (the Summacron 50 is well scrached up) or long telephoto lenses that seem awkward on such a small rangefinder. It even came with a large attachment that allows one to look through the lens, though it was dusty and dim. Anyways, the only thing that seemed usable was the Leitz Summaron 35mm 3.5.
I wound up buying a Bessa-R to be able to shoot with it reliably. When I started using it, I noticed right away that it was a real mixed bag. Some of the time I would get a decently clear shot, but other times I had this tremendous haze that cut the contrast so badly that things almost seemed mis-focused. I put the lens down after that for a few years.
In the past year, I have taken an interest in using it again, as I like the portability of RF and way of shooting it entails. I began looking into getting it cleaned...but something has kept me from going through with it... I almost feel like if I have it cleaned, it will lose some of its essence. I recently found a few threads that mention this myth of the "Leica glow", which has gotten me interested in the subject. The strange thing is that this "glow", for me and many others, seems to happen only by chance. I do realize that it gets more distinct the wider open the aperture is, and the longer the shutter speed....but sometimes that doesn't seem to matter at all..
I guess I'm starting this thread to see what anyone else thinks about this subject of the "glow", and if anyone, from looking at the photo's I am going to post, thinks this lens is fucked or not. Feel free to post any "glow" photos of your own.
A few years ago, I found someone's Leica IIIF setup at my local antique/estate sale shop. I assume the guy died. He was a pilot, as I found some photos of him and his lady from the war near the camera, and a slip stating that he bought the set while based in Japan, presumably. I wound up with an old IIIF body (with a bad curtain), a few lenses that were either bad (the Summacron 50 is well scrached up) or long telephoto lenses that seem awkward on such a small rangefinder. It even came with a large attachment that allows one to look through the lens, though it was dusty and dim. Anyways, the only thing that seemed usable was the Leitz Summaron 35mm 3.5.
I wound up buying a Bessa-R to be able to shoot with it reliably. When I started using it, I noticed right away that it was a real mixed bag. Some of the time I would get a decently clear shot, but other times I had this tremendous haze that cut the contrast so badly that things almost seemed mis-focused. I put the lens down after that for a few years.
In the past year, I have taken an interest in using it again, as I like the portability of RF and way of shooting it entails. I began looking into getting it cleaned...but something has kept me from going through with it... I almost feel like if I have it cleaned, it will lose some of its essence. I recently found a few threads that mention this myth of the "Leica glow", which has gotten me interested in the subject. The strange thing is that this "glow", for me and many others, seems to happen only by chance. I do realize that it gets more distinct the wider open the aperture is, and the longer the shutter speed....but sometimes that doesn't seem to matter at all..
I guess I'm starting this thread to see what anyone else thinks about this subject of the "glow", and if anyone, from looking at the photo's I am going to post, thinks this lens is fucked or not. Feel free to post any "glow" photos of your own.
