I know most of the guys here possess more than one lens of the same focal length. If you have the latest version, why keep the old versions or continue to acquire old versions of the same focal length. The latest version is normally consider better, so if you have a better one, why not sell the old ones and get new versions of the focal length that you don't have? Talking on EV, I think it relates with film speed, aperture, shutter speed - what is their relationship and is there any formula between them. Can any body advise on e.g. an EV of 16 at film speed of of ASA 100, what is the aperture is a shutter speed of 1/60 is used. How about EV 32 based on same film and shutter speed. I like so much about this site as my questions are always answered and I have learn so much about Leica M photography. Thanks a lot

-- tom tong (tom.tong@ckh.com.hk), September 16, 2001

Answers

Get a copy of the out-of-print "Leica Manual" from about 1955.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), September 16, 2001.

Once I have used a lens for many years, I become reluctant to part with it, even if I later buy a newer or "better" version. In general, I've regretted selling Leica cameras and lenses. I wish I had back my M3, IIIf, and model D. I wish I still had my Summarit and 35mm Summaron f/2.8. I guess I don't miss the 50mm f/2.8 Elmar that much. But still . . .

All Leica lenses have their uses. Some of the earlier ones are less sharp and less contrasty, but I have belatedly come to appreciate that Leitz designed lenses to have a certain balance among the various design considerations that gives them very pleasing imaging properties. Thus once you've grown fond of a lens for what you've done with it, it should be a keeper. Newer lenses are only guests in the camera bag until they prove their worth. So it's not a good thing to trade in the old ones impusively, or because someone said the new ones are better.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), September 17, 2001.

Tom:

EV refers to a given amount of light/ film(ASA) combination. An EV of 16 is quite bright and corresponds to the following for ASA 100 film, 1/60 sec at f:32. EV32 is off the scale but each step in EV corresponds to one f:stop or one increment in shutter speed. This information is taken from my Gossen Luna-Pro meter.

With regards to the multiple lenses of the same focal length, they have different characteristics. A 90 Elmar weighs about 250 grams and an older 90 Summicron about 600 grams. One for low light, the other for hiking.

Most of all I feel this forum urges us to shoot film and share out experiences, and thoughts.

Mark J.

-- Mark A. Johnson (logic@gci.net), September 17, 2001.

It is an absolute joy to own and USE as many diferent Leica lenses and bodies as possible. This is near the top of my list of goals in life. If you use these lenses and extensively you will notice all them have a particular personality not unlike a particular vintage of wine. I just bought a very old Summar and I intend to photograph castles in Europe in the rain only on Tuesdays while I will use the Summitar on Wednesdays and so forth.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), September 17, 2001.

I don't own duplicate focal lengths for the simple reason that I have acquired my current Leica M kit fairly recently and bought most lenses for it new. The prohibitive prices makes buying duplicates of lenses foolish, unless you already have a complete complement and are wealthier than I.

However, I can see having both an older 35 as well as the current ASPH, same for some of the 90s and 135s. They differ in imaging qualities which makes having duplicates not really quite duplication...

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), September 17, 2001.

Here's the bad joke of the day. It's about 90mm lenses -- which I don't even have myself (yet). But if you read all about the 90s here you will often see that many people who have the newest most expensive one (the APO ASPH) or the newest Elmarit, they will always point out that these are absolutely sharp, and thus especially good for landscapes, documentation etc. But those loving portraits will always say that the same two are way too sharp, and that is why they need to keep or need to get e.g. a penultimate 2/90. So it's never just simply a question of weight, size, imbalance, EV, speed, aperture, etc.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), September 17, 2001.

Agree with Michael. I got rid of an old (sorry) 35 Jupiter in Screwmount when I purchased one of the limited edition 35 Aspheric Summicrons Leica introduced a few years back. Boy to I miss the Jupiter! For 95 percent of my work I wouldn't give up the new lens, but there are certain conditions where the soft, nearly pastel contrast of the Jupiter was beautiful and can't be reproduced with the new lens. I sold the Jupiter for about $150.00 US with it's finder - the sorriest $150.00 I've ever made.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), September 17, 2001.

For me, it was simply the process of looking over photos, some decades old, shot with old lenses that were sold off to buy the newer ones. Not everything shows up on a test chart. I'm not a "touchy- feely" guy, but I do believe that intangible, unquantifiable qualities of a lens are a part of the overall effect on film. I curse myself often for not keeping those old "bad on paper" lenses. Having a current 50mm Summicron and an old Summarit in the bag is not a big problem as far as weight and dimensions are concerned, but having options to control the results on film adds to the controls you have as a photographer.

When I want to count every brick in a building, I'll use the current 90mm Elmarit M, when I don't want to count every pore in a girl's face, I won't.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 17, 2001.

All the following is based on memory, which at my present age is not 100% reliable...

The EV (Exposure Value) standard was originally set up to correspond to a standard where an EV 0 would require an exposure of 1 sec at f1.0 with ISO 100 film. Each increment of EV thereafter equals a one- stop change in amount of light, ie; EV1 = 1/2 sec at f1.0 or 1 sec at f1.4 with ISO 100 film. Interestingly, this progression happens to closely correspond to the BDE (Basic Daylight Exposure) or "Sunny 16" rule as well, where EV 16 equals an exposure of 1/125 at f16 with ISO 100 film. So, if you cannot remeber the first part, the second part will get you very close to the required exposure with a given EV.

As for owning multiple lenses of the same focal-length... Better resolution and contrast do not necessarily translate to meaning the best tool for producing photographic art. Many older lenses exhibit an intangible quality that cannot be duplicated by lighting or filtration, and hence produce different, and often more artistic, images. But, since the term "art" is very subjective and there is no way to objectively list these traits, lenses tend to get pigeon-holed based only on their tangible characteristics like resolution and contrast. In large format circles this phenomonon prevails to the extent that you'll often see prices for lenses manufactured in the 40's being 2 - 3 times higher than their modern contemporaries, simply because of the unique "look" they are able to imprint.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), September 17, 2001.

Others have answered the EV question for you and I was interested to read their explanations.

In my case, I have two 180mm R lenses: (1) a 180/4 Elmar-R, which I bought first; (2) a 180/3.4 Apo-Telyt-R, which I acquired quite recently and have not yet used. I was thinking of selling the Elmar now that I have the Apo-Telyt but then I realized that it has three advantages over the Apo-Telyt, namely, it's much lighter and more compact, which makes it easier for traveling; it can accommodate my E55 polarizer, which also fits my 35/2, 60/2.8 and 90/2.8 R lenses; and it can focus a lot closer than the Apo-Telyt.

The virtues of the Apo-Telyt are that it is 1/2 stop faster than the Elmar and its quality of reproduction at long distance is reputed to be excellent, which is why I bought it. So, it seems that both these 180mm lenses may have their uses for me and I think I'll hang on to both of them, at least for now.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), September 17, 2001.

I sold my 21/4 when I got my newer 21/3.4, but I still have a 50/2 DR even after owning the latest 50/2, I know eventualy IŽll sell the DR, but it has been such a compainer that I still donŽt dear, or probably will sell both and get a Žlux, on the 35 mm field, I have used the 2.8 summaron for the last 15 years and for me was great, lately I got a 1.4 non asph, and then a 35/2 pre asph, and still have the three of them, I like all, but in a future IŽll probably get a 35/1.4 asph and end up with four of them, no no no, my subconsient betreat me, I like all of them Doctor, what do you recomend?

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), September 18, 2001.

"Get a copy of the out-of-print "Leica Manual" from about 1955."

Alternatively, decode the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus (out- of-print, single known copy last seen in 1134 near to Avignon in the hands of an old man with a white beard and sparkly hat) and after manufacturing the philosopher's stone you'll be omniscient and immortal. That way you'll know all about exposure values and you'll also be able to use your knowledge for the remaining lifetime of the universe. Talk about added value!

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), September 18, 2001.

The reason I use different lenses of the same focal length is that each and every Leica lens has its own characteristics. For example, I have a 50mm collapsible Summicron which is excellent for colour prints.I believe this lens was made some time in the 1950's It produces a soft glow which I find very pleasing. On the other hand, I have a 50mm Summicron made in the early 70's. Much sharper, less soft.I use this lens for black and white prints, where it seems to do best. I will eventually shoot different films with this lens just to see the results.I have shot transparency film with it, especially Fuji Provia, with exceptional brilliance and clarity. Perform experiments and see for yourself. Borrow someone's lens and try it out. It is a lot of fun doing so. Hope this information helps, although it is somewhat subjective!

-- John Alfred Tropiano (jat18@psu.edu), September 18, 2001.

Now I feel better about my 50mm, 35mm and 28mm collections. Weird thing is that I'm not even a 50mm sort of guy--but recently I got a 50 DR to keep company with my two 50/2 Sumicrons (collap & rigid), 1.4 Summilux, 3.5 Elmar, 2 Canon 1.2's, Canon 1.4 and Canon 1.8--and, I almost forgot, Summar f2. There is absolutely no rational reason for keeping half these darn lenses. But I do. Rational? Take a Valium and read on.

The new Sumicron works best with my Rapidwinder because of the focusing tab; it also focuses do to .07 m. The Summilux 1.4 is fast. The Canon 1.2 can be mounted on screw and M mounts. Why 2??? One is fogged and does great soft focus. The Canon 1.4. Screw mounts, lighter and better than the 1.2's. The Canon 1.8? Lighter than the other screw mounts. The Summar? My first Leica lens (bought with my IIIf). Interesting effects--pleasantly soft. Also a gem on my Bessa T and Hexar RF--seemless f stops. Elmar 3.5.: Very light. Comes alive on my Hexar RF (took it to Paris--oow, la, la!) Close focus great with adaptor for screw mount Leicas. The Dual Range Summicron. Super close focus. Tight portraits. Prefer to 90mm, etc. The collapsing 50 'cron? I did consider selling it once but the price I was offered was so low that I said no way. I might find a close focus adaptor for it.

Now as for my 35mm's-- Unlike my Summilux 1.4 my Sumaron 3.5 can go on my CLE and Bessa T. The screw mount version can ride on my Bessa L and Barnack Leicas. The new Voigtlander 2.5 is little, light and a deal I couldn't pass up. My old Canon 1.8. Well, it's fast, light and optically not bad and mounts on my scew mount cameras.

And my 28mm's----- "Ahhhhhh! Stop!" you say.

Anyway, suppose your significant other gets into Leicas, you want to shoot color neg, color slides and b/w at the same time, or one lens is lost or has to be repaired? NIce thing is that lenses don't take up that much space.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4u.or.jp), September 21, 2001.

Wow Alex... I'd like to see what you would have if you were a 50mm sort of guy!

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 22, 2001.