Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have three Leica lenses: 1. 50 Noctilux, just for the sake of 1.0 and really desperate want to try and have it. 2. 75 mm lux, which is the best lenses for casual portrait. Really satisfied! 3. 35 ASPH cron, for small size and easy to carry with excellent result. Since 35 ASPH cron is the smallest of my Leica lenses, it is the one that I carry most of the time. My recomendation is go with the cron for the size reason. (I know 50 elmar is smaller but the stop is 2.8). JSJ - ----- Original Message ----- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <ramarren@bayarea.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Cc: <crispinv@uclink4.berkeley.edu> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 6:26 AM Subject: [Leica] Re: 35 f/1.4 ASPH vs 35 f/2 ASPH > I looked long and hard at the 35/1.4 ASPH vs 35/2 ASPH question too. > Much as the extra stop would be handy at some times, I just couldn't > justify the extra money spent there when the 35/2 ASPH made such > beautiful images. I used that money towards buying a new Elmarit-M > 90/2.8. > > Godfrey > > >I'm in the market for a new 35mm lens. So my question is: whats the > >difference between the leica 35 f/1.4 ASPH and the 35 f/2 ASPH, besides > >a stop and about $800? Besides giving me an edge in low-light > >situations (which would in fact come in useful) does the 1.4 give me > >better performance at all stops? I guess i can (sorta) afford either > >one, but I'd really like one of those 75mm f/1.4 lenses too, so any > >money i can save now goes into that fund. > >