Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote: > >> Lottermoser George <imagist3@mac.com> wrote: >> >>> I have the 15 Super Elmar (not the 2.8). I find it a lovely lens and >>> a fine performer. I have little to "compare" it to. >>> Don't have the WATE or Nikon 14 etc.. >>> I also have the 15 Heliar. What sort of comparison do you seek? >> >>> >>> On Nov 5, 2007, at 5:54 PM, telyt@earthlink.net wrote: >>> >>>> so.... nobody knows how the 15 R compares? >>> >> >> flare & distortion at least, full frame preferable. I find it a bit odd >> >> that a discussion of 14-15-16mm lenses includes such diverse tools as >> those made by Cosina, Nikon, Canon and others but no R >> >> Doug Herr >> Birdman of Sacramento >> http://www.wildlightphoto.com >> > > >I can give you 7,975 reasons. > >That's a lot of reasons! > >Mark William Rabiner >markrabiner.com > No question of its price but this thread has included statements such as : "The 14's for the SLR's, the zooms that go down to 16 or 17 all have serious distortion. The best is probably the 12-24 f/4-5.6 Sigma." Leica sells a 15mm f/2.8 (made by Schneider) for the R cameras and according to some reports its distortion is very low. It ought to be at least mentioned, for some people the low distortion will override the high price. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com