Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I can't agree with that. I had the 28-70 but traded it in for the 35-70 after a few weeks. In my opinion it is not up to Leica standards. At 28 there is too much barrel distortion. The full opening was not very useful for me, too low in contrast. The variable aperture makes it useless with non-TTL flash. Maybe I had a bad lens, but this was the first and only time I regretted buying a Leica lens. I now have the 35-70 and the 24, both are great, truly Leica lenses. Michiel grduprey@rockwellcollins.com wrote: > I will have to agree with Marc about the 28 - 70 lens, although the > mechanical quality is not up to Leica standards. I will also qualify this > last, I have the first version of the lens and the built in hood has > gotten to the point that it does not stay in place at all. Otherwise a > great lens. > > Gene > > > > The 28-70 is a GREAT lens, don't listen to the purist hubub. I have > only two R lenses left, the 28-70 and a Summilux 50 - I find the 28-70 > to be extremely convenient and of excellent quality. In particular, it > makes fantastic images of people in the 50-70 range, and I use it as a > 'candid portrait' lense very often. It is also a relative bargain. > > The lens cap is a pain - it always falls off, but then I hardly ever > use it anyway... > > That is my impression, but I'll admit to not being a Leica Snob; I > judge the lenses by the images, not the country of manufacture :-) > > - marc > > On Sep 28, 2004, at 11:53 PM, SML wrote: > > >>Hello, >> >> I have been using the 80-200/4 Vario-Elmar with satisfaction >>specially >>with black & white film for several years despite the fact that it is >>made >>in Japan. In my book, it performs as good as a German lens >>mechanically and >>optically. Now I am thinking of getting me either one of the zoom >>lenses in >>the subject line to cover the wide side. I understand that both are >>made in >>Japan (by Cosina or Minolta). I would appreciate any of your >>experience >>with either lens compared with the 80-200/4. I know some say the >>28-70 is a >>black sheep of the Leica lens family if the 35-70/4 is pretty well >>comparing >>with the 80-200 which is optically excellent enough to bear the Leica >>name. >>Is it pretty much in the same league as the old 35-70/3.5 (designed by >>Minolta) which is generally considered mediocre. >> >>Thanks, >>David >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Leica Users Group. >>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >