Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/11/18

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

Subject: [Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons
From: digiratidoc at gmail.com (James Laird)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:50:22 -0600
References: <p06230909c90a08a455e1@192.168.1.18> <AANLkTi=yAfCtqoWMbsOnJR2vRpgc7QVqq+QdeX_GhLoR@mail.gmail.com> <20101118161819.GE60960@selenium.125px.com> <AANLkTi=YswU8Rgi7gEA_veqhuPrdroGAXNGqNqrjX-Qn@mail.gmail.com> <664EB1D1-46F5-4B5D-A98C-E3F4A72C08CD@btinternet.com>

Frank,

I stand corrected. I don't own any Canon glass but I assumed the 24-70
would fare better than that. It would have been interesting though if
they'd been able to mount the Summilux on the 1Ds and then compare.
Certainly would have been a better test of the relative merits of the
two sensors. But I guess as Tim said 'it's a camera system to camera
system comparison. For fun.'

Jim

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Frank Dernie
<Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com> wrote:
> As zoom lenses go the Canon 24-105 L lens is excellent, not a dog. Unless 
> you thing all zooms are dogs, as I am inclined to.
> I have quite a few lenses of different makes. None better the 50mm 
> summilux Asph...
> FD
>
> On 18 Nov, 2010, at 18:17, James Laird wrote:
>
>> Don't put a dog
>> of a lens in front of the sensor and compare it with a Summilux!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from frank.dernie at btinternet.com (FRANK DERNIE) ([Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons)
In reply to: Message from digiratidoc at gmail.com (James Laird) ([Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons)
Message from tgray at 125px.com (Tim Gray) ([Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons)
Message from digiratidoc at gmail.com (James Laird) ([Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Camera-Lens comparisons)