Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> > I've been thinking lately that Nikon glass is kind of "weird." They > have some great ones, but then some real holes in the lineup, IMHO. > I greatly prefer my CV 50/1.5 to my Nikon 50/1.8 (which most Nikonians > seem to prefer to the 50/1.4). Already, I like the 90/2.8 better > than my > 85/1.8 (ok, not a premo piece of Nikon glass). But in both of these > cases, > the Nikon stuff is brutally sharp, but very, very clinical. And > wirey bokus > maximus! CV 35/2.5 vs. Nikkor 35/2 is a closer call. I really > like the 35/2 > on the D70. I second the "weird" thought of the current (and past) Nikkor lineup. It's almost like they are ignoring the Digital market all together, with no inexpensive "normal" fast primes, and even their "normal" (slower) primes aren't noted for being the "Best in Class..." Of course the same company that makes those lenses also makes the completely retro SP and 35mm f/1.8 in their rangefinder mount. Too bad. I'd like a 35mm f/1.4 AF (made in bulk, with a smaller image circle, could be cheap) or even a Real Flagship lens; another f/1.2 or f/1.1 would be awesome. Anyway. Someday I'll mount my Leica lenses on a digital body. "When" is the question. JD