Leica Summaron 35mm f/2.8 - Post your pics

Leica M2, Summaron 35mm f/2.8, Tmax400, AdoxMCC110

Erik.

49589738087_ce1f8e625b_b.jpg
 
Vobluda said:
Not that I am the one to decide but I find 3.5 photos here trolling and that 3.5 photos has nothing to do in this thread as 2.8 has specific character and this is thread about 2.8.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it isn't for me to decide as well, read on previous page.
You should also read page 139 here:
http://www.furnfeather.net/books/pdf/llcforweb.pdf

Pete B said:
I'd like to see a separate 3.5 thread with shots like that. I think the 3.5 is often overlooked. I'd like to see what people do with theirs.
Pete
Click to expand...

This will be ideal.

35 3.5 goggled.

Mango? Jerry!
by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr
 
I was wondering similar but opposite situation earlier because I saw

Leica 3.5cm F3.5 Summaron lens

and I wanted to post my Summaron 35/2.8 pic there but not sure if I should, but then found out there was this separate thread for the 35/2.8.

I guess that thread is more towards LTM "3.5cm" F3.5 version, but my understanding is the Summaron 35/3.5 M-mount is basically "repacked" LTM lens sharing the similar/identical optics as the LTM variant.

I had a similar "what should I do" situation for Elmar 50/2.8 thread which was mainly about the 1st gen M mount Elmar 50/2.8, not the Elmar-M 50/2.8, and I have photos to post from Elmar 50/3.5 M-mount (also "repacked" from LTM Red Scale 50/3.5).

In the end we are not harming anything, and I'll follow whatever guidelines we have. :)

OK here is a shot with the 35/2.8:


Smiles by Suguru Nishioka, on Flickr

M4-P, Summaron 35/2.8, Tri-X 400, Pushed to 1600, Rodinal 1+49, Scanned with BEOON, X-E1, Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH.
 
Bendj said:
Bit of a stretch don't you think?
Click to expand...
No, it's not "a stretch"... Look carefully. It's not a massive big deal, but it's there. This is very common.
No, it's not blatant, but on the left, the girl with Down Syndrome - she is separate from the rest of the girls. Things are complicated, the group of girls may be okay with the girl on the left - but it is clearly visible that they are a separate group, a little "clique" and don't want to be real close to the girl on the left. Their hands are folded. It's an observation. The photo may not be showing the whole truth or other details, but the hesitance of the girls on the right to "include" the girl with down syndrome shows. The body language is everywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top