RE: [Leica] Is there a Nikon list?

["Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@istar.ca>]

At 11:18 PM 11/26/98 +0000, Howard Sanner wrote:
>
>>Thu, 26 Nov 1998, Robert G. Stevens wrote:
>>>I wondered why I was using an EOS with
>>> F4-5.6 lenses.
>
>   When I first started researching Leica after about 30 years of
>using the Nikon F system, I didn't (and, frankly, still don't) 
>understand what people were talking about with the "fast Leica 
>lenses." Sheesh, the most common 135's and 90's are f/4, and the
>Noctilux isn't that common, even if it is fast. I thought these
>quite a come down from my 85mm f/1.8, 105mm f/2.5, and 135mm
>f/2.8 Nikkors. I do think the argument is valid that one can hand
>hold an M Leica at slower shutter speeds than an SLR, and thus
>lenses don't have to be as fast for the same performance.


Howard:

What I meant by fast Leica lenses was that compared to the variable
aperture zooms on the EOS, the Summicrons seemed very fast.  My first R was
an R4 with a 35mm Summicron.  In my M, I have the 35mm Summicron and the
Noctilux.  But all of this aside, the Leica glass is true fast glass in
that it can be shot wide open with excellent results.  This can not be said
of most other manufacturers lenses.  So the Leica glass is truely fast glass.

In your comments of common 135 and 90 speeds, you will find in the R system
the 2.8 lenses are very common and bought cheaply used.  In the M system,
the 90's would be very common in 2.8, and the 135 less common in 2.8.  You
were comparing apples to oranges when you compared your Nikon F to Leica M.
 If you compared it to Leica R, you will find it has fast lenses like the
Nikkors you listed.


Regards,

Robert Stevens