Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison
From: len-1 at comcast.net (Leonard Taupier)
Date: Sun Nov 4 19:24:17 2007
References: <20071104185403.9415D54@resin15.mta.everyone.net>

Alastair,

I have wanted the DMR for some time. When I bought my R8 the intent  
was to get a DMR to go with it. I'm afraid I waited too long. Since a  
lot of my shooting is either birding or macro, like flowers, The long  
Telyts and the APO 100mm macro Elmarit on a 20D worked just fine.    
But I found my wide angle shots on a 1.5 or 1.6 crop body lacking. So  
I went to the canon 5D which I consider a very capable camera. Leica  
wide angle lenses don't work too well if at all on Canon bodies.  
Nikon lens are hard to focus without a focus confirmation adapter. I  
don't like the Canon wides. So I'll just wait for the D3. Fortunately  
the WATE on the M8 works just fine.

Len




On Nov 4, 2007, at 9:54 PM, <afirkin@afirkin.com>  
<afirkin@afirkin.com> wrote:

> Len,
> I have to say, that I've seen some surprizingly odd Canon wide  
> angles in my travels. Quite often the owners is sprouting its  
> virtues and so I keep very quite, but I keep thinking "nothing like  
> my wides". This is one reason that I have not dabbled into Canon's  
> EOS system, though I'm sure it would be fantastic for the wildlife  
> stuff I've been doing in the polar regions. BUT even with tele's  
> the sharpness is certainly no better than my 180 with 2x converter,  
> so I was really very happy with the DMR. (I really do not shoot  
> fast enough to panic about the buffer, though I can see why others  
> would). Of course the DMR limits my wides by being less than full  
> frame. Better start saving for that R10!!!!!
>
>
> Cheers
>
> --- len-1@comcast.net wrote:
>
> From: Leonard Taupier <len-1@comcast.net>
> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison
> Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 21:22:07 -0500
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I'm kinda fussy with the glass I buy. I can't tolerate bad barrel
> distortion. The biggest offenders of course are the wide range zooms
> which have barrel at the wide end and pincushion at the narrow end. I
> have been using Nikon lenses for many years and pretty much have not
> had to worry about this distortion. I also have the Nikon AF 14mm
> f2.8 lens and find it to be pretty free of distortion. Just like my
> Leica gear.
>
> I have been using a Canon 5D camera for the last few months primarily
> for it's low noise and to utilize the full frame for my Nikon and
> Leica wide angle lenses via adapters. Well I decided to get a Canon
> zoom to carry around and I got the Canon 24-105mm L zoom. This is one
> of Canon's so called L professional lenses. I found this lens was
> very sharp but the barrel distortion was so bad at 24mm that I would
> not use it. The distortion was very weird. The upper half of the
> frame was fairly straight but the bottom half of the frame bowed in
> like a fish hook. I took it back to my dealer and tried another new
> one right off the shelf. Same exact performance. The dealer is very
> good so he said get anything else you want. So I tried the 24-70 L
> zoom. It was very good at 24mm but at 70mm it had bad pincushion.
> Both of these lenses are Canon's L lenses and cost over $1000. I
> think they're crap. I ended taking home a fixed focal length lens. I
> won't buy another Canon zoom. I'm actually thinking of getting rid of
> all my Canon gear, except for the 20D I use with the 560 Telyt, when
> the Nikon D3 comes out.
>
> Len
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2007, at 8:32 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>> Barrel distortion, the heartbreak of BD can be easily remedied now
>> a days in
>> Photoshop. You can not read a lens review anymore without the guy,
>> Thom H,
>> or Ken R. telling you the exact coordinates to punch in to take out
>> the
>> barrel distortion that a new nikon zoom will have at a certain
>> focal length
>> (FL).
>> The time will come soon that lens designers will just say "we'll
>> just let
>> them fix the rest in software" and go home for dinner and give you
>> a CD or
>> URL so you can more easily punch them in. or they will be punched in
>> automatically as part of the way the raw file thing works.
>>
>>
>> I just shot a thing which came out today in the NYTimes in which I
>> used
>> instead of the blissful no stress 12-24 f4 zoom I'd been using for 5
>> different things. I used an:
>> AF NIKKOR 14mm f/2.8D ED
>>
>> Quite a chuck of high tech glass. Leica priced almost.
>> http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/af/wideangle/
>> af_14mmf_28d/index
>> .htm
>>
>> :
>> Hybrid aspherical lens elements and ED glass elements for high-
>> resolution
>> and high-contrast images
>> Used as 21mm (converted to 135 format) wide-angle lens when
>> attached to the
>> Nikon DX-format digital SLR's
>> RF (Rear Focusing) system for fast and smooth optical performance
>>
>>
>> I think it made a difference. It doesn't even look all that wide
>> angle at
>> all in many of the shots I've been repeatedly told I assume since
>> it was so
>> well corrected.
>>
>> I wonder if the fact that it was meant to work well as a 14mm lens
>> and then
>> we're chopping off the outside 1.5 edges of it to make it a 21 is a
>> big plus
>> in its performance. Like a baseball batter swinging with two bats  
>> then
>> taking one away and stepping up to the plate.
>> Its a heavy lens. A TCP Tunnel Carpel protagonist.
>> A Tylenol is needed before and after heavy use.
>> And or well placed helium filled balloons.
>> Gary Fong makes one I think. A frosted one you can flash through. And
>> lightens any load.
>> LumiQuest makes one with a built in pump works with Hydrogen if you
>> know
>> where to get it.
>>
>> Pump it up too big on a windy day and watch your camera fly over a
>> tree and
>> get caught in a telephone wire.
>>
>>
>> My spell checker suggested "LumiQuest" was really "Cumquats" just  
>> now.
>>
>> I'd call that fuzzy logic.
>>> From the fuzz in someone's navel.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> markrabiner.com
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


In reply to: Message from afirkin at afirkin.com (afirkin@afirkin.com) ([Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison)