Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Henry Ambrose wrote: > > >snip As Nikon didn't have anything that > >> could touch the 100 APO (and still don't) I snip > >> Bill Rosauer > >So you are saying the famous and awesome 105 2.8 macro is compleatly > >outclassed by Leica? > > snip I have the non AF version. > >Mark Rabiner > > > Mark, snip > I've extensively tested the Nikon AF version 2.8 macro, the manual 105 > 2.5 and 1.8 lenses (and lots of others) with my digital scanning camera > and with film. I could only test the Leica with film since it won't fit > on the scanner. I've yet to find a Nikon lens thats real good until its > stopped down quite a bit. If you mostly use the Nikon lens stopped down > you'll be happy. Its the wide open aperture performance that Nikon > stumbles with. > > I use the Nikon 105 2.8 AFD (and the 60 2.8 macro) everyday. I nearly > always use them at f 8 or 11 and they perform very well. > snip > > The amazing thing to me is that Nikon does not make a lense that can > compete with Leica glass. I guess they wrote off that part of the market. > > > Henry Ever lay your hands on a 200 macro? Might be a reason to retain a Nikon body!?