Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leica set a limit of one meter, for a close-up, on the earlier 35-75. Hence, you couldn't fill the frame for a head shot. Then, as Ted mentioned earlier, the front rotated, compounding the usage of a polarizer. Otherwise, it was an adequate zoom for the era. S.d. On Oct 27, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Charlie Chan wrote: > Ted, > > Not sure I do. I've not handled or used one of the older 35-70/3.5 > designs that were produced in co-operation with Minolta. It's funny > though how many people have berated the earlier Leica zooms eg the > 35-70s and 28-70s. Sure they aren't as good as Leica primes, but > what zoom is? The 70-180 APO possibly. But very few end users eg > picture editors, print buyers etc care whether the image was shot > with a zoom or a prime. If the image is good enough, then the > hardware used does not matter. > > Best wishes, > > Charlie Chan > Cheltenham, UK > > topoxforddoc at btinternet.com > www.cancer-surgeon.co.uk > www.charlie-chan.co.uk > > > > On 28 Oct 2010, at 00:37, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> wrote: > >> Hi Charlie, >> >> I have the f3.5, 35-70 that is supposed to be the better because it >> handles polarizer filter without any problem with the front lens >> revolving therefore throwing the polarizing effect off. >> >> Do you have any words of wisdom about this lens? >> >> thank you, >> cheers, >> Dr. ted >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlie Chan" <topoxforddoc at >> btinternet.com >> > >> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 3:31 PM >> Subject: Re: [Leica] R Mid-Range Zooms >> >> >>> Jim, >>> >>> In order of performance (and funnily price too) >>> >>> 35-70/2.8 asph - stellar performance and price - really rare >>> 28-90/2.8 asph - just discontinued when R line killed off - >>> probably Leica's 'best' mid range zoom - truly excellent >>> performance and currently going for about GBP1200 >>> 35-70/4 - if you can accept the slow aperture, then it's actually >>> pretty good >>> 28-70 ROM - Sigma/Leica lens - not nearly as bad as some make out >>> - it's cheap (for Leica) and perfectly acceptable - a bit of >>> barrel distortion at 28 >>> 28-70 older lenses - not sure >>> >>> Charlie Chan >>> Cheltenham, UK >>> >>> topoxforddoc at btinternet.com >>> www.cancer-surgeon.co.uk >>> www.charlie-chan.co.uk >>> >>> >>> >>> On 26 Oct 2010, at 01:50, James Laird wrote: >>> >>>> Just to get off the D700 thread, I'd like the LUG's opinions of the >>>> 28-70 and 35-70 R zooms. Are they just rebadged Minolta lenses that >>>> are built better? Opinions for or against would be appreciated. I'm >>>> looking for a good zoom for my new Sony A900, and would be >>>> willing to >>>> use R glass with an adapter if it's worth the trouble, or should I >>>> just stick with Minolta/Sony/Zeiss glass? >>>> >>>> Jim Laird >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information