Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I was thinking like you until I had it in my hands this afternoon. I don't know the quality of the results, but mechanicaly it worth every penny of $2.000. Incredible ! Lucien >I must be missing something here...Collectability aside, the prime attraction of >the M series its the outstanding mechanical quality of the= camera and the equally >outstanding quality of the lens optics. LUGERS debate endlessly about which >version of which l! >ens, with how many elements, is how many gnat hairs sharper than what other >version of the same lens. Fine. So why the excitement about the ne= w Tri-Elmar? >According to the literature posted at the Leica website, the new lens "i= s >distinguished by a good to very good renedition at all three focal lengths... >"Aberrations such as coma, vignetting, and curvature of field are small = to begin >with and can be virtually eliminated by stopping down to f/5.6-8..= =2E" >"Good to very good"? For $2,000 >"stopping down to f/5.6 to f/8" ? For $2,000 >What happened to "excellent to very good"? >Granted, this is the first sort-of-zoom for a rangefinder - right? But given the >quality of each of the individual lenses, and given the small size and weight of >each of the individual lenses, and given that while n= ot all of us have 28s but >virtually all of! >us have 35s and 50s that will fit in the same coat pocket and will produ= ce razor->sharp images, what gives? >I know it's a Leica...But that doesn't make it worth running out to spen= d $2,000 >for. In fact, it sounds like the Leica equivalent of the original= Nikkor 35-85 (?) >zoom. It was compact, but the images it produced sure weren't up to Nikon quality. >Any thoughts?