It was first produced by Minolta when they and Leica were allied in the 1980's. Used there is a huge price difference at times for these lenses. Leica also has a 28-70 version, but it is made by Sigma and is not up to the other two lenses, according to most test. The F4 is slightly sharper wide open because it is a newer design (the F3.5 is a Minolta design dating back to the mid 80's), but I could not see anything appreciable up to 11X14" prints. I tried this (used of course, it is disc'd) as well as a new Leica 35-70 F4 and found that there wasn't enough sharpness difference to justify the cost of a new lens.
LEICA MINI ZOOM PLUS
I purchased this lens plus an R body for the times when the convenience of using a zoom would be handy (my normal equipment is Leica M with prime lenses). It would have been better if they had built the meter to factor in center-weighted, but I think it is simple dead-center spot metering, or at least that is the way it acts.An excellent all round lens in my opinion. So if you point at something that is dimmer than the surroundings, you might overexpose the surroundings. It used spot metering with whatever you have dead-center in your viewfinder. I think one of the problems with the mini zoom is just an inherent design problem. Again, thanks so much for all of your help :) Nice! Let me know how it turns out when you shoot some film. I have no idea if it made a difference though. I stuck a q-tip dipped in rubbing alcohol into that little hole that houses the sensor. Thanks again for all the advice/troubleshooting! Yeah, try another batch.Ĭould my local camera shop clean the light sensor? Maybe you're willing to try it on your Mini for the both of us :). Also, the mini zoom is very heavily weighted on the center for metering. I guess it could be many problems that would cause an overexposure (which is I guess what you are talking about). Now I am thinking maybe I have the same problem. Come to think of it I have also had some washed out prints lately. Try cleaning the light sensor, which is a clear little white bulb. Well, I guess that it would be possible to create a soft effect by overexposing. I've seen those fixed lens mini's but haven't tried one. While I have you, what do you think about a Mini with a fixed lense (Mini, Mini 2, I would mention a Mini 3 but I can't afford one). So many variables! And the lab I'm using is very legit, I'm pretty sure it's either me or the camera that's causing the pics to be soft :). I'm going to do an experiment tomorrow and take some stationary photos to see what happens. I was taking pics of my 2 year old (a moving target) so it could just be the subject matter. Hoping that's not the case because I bought it off of ebay. The camera had some mechanical issues that Leica resolved. I read in a thread about someone who consistently had "soft" photos and finally sent his Mini Zoom off to Leica. It's fun to carry around, nice and compact and well built. Basically the mini zoom is good at giving you a nice analog image, but its negatives are about a half second shutter lag and it needs a lot of light, especially for slower ISOs with the zoom. I've had good results with Superia, so you might also want to try a different processing lab. Thanks Filmbox35! I live in the South so sunshine is abundant even now despite it being "winter". Ektar 100 is pretty bold and contrasty IMO.
Some places seem to pour on the colors more so than others.Įktar 100 and Velvia 50 are pretty good, but the deal is that you need pretty bright weather. It depends a lot on who makes the prints, I think. So I thought I'd ask this group: what kind of film do you love using with your Mini Zooms? And I should add that I'm open to b/w or color.thanks! Overall, I like crisp, saturated, "contrasty" pics. I've also shot some Ilford HP5 but haven't gotten it back from the lab to see how they came out. The softness worked in some of the pics but overall, I wasn't very happy with the results. Just bought a Mini Zoom off of ebay and shot some Fuji Superia with some very "soft" results.
0 kommentar(er)
