Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/15

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] 60 Macro
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:24:00 -0700
References: <20000515142423.DDFZ26552.mail.rdc1.tn.home.com@[24.17.144.74]>

Henry Ambrose wrote:
> 
> Mikiro wrote:
> >In my limited experience (I do not copy flat subjects!), a 60/2.8 Macro
> >Elmarit, a 60/2.8 Macro Planar, a 60/2.8 AF Nikkor, and a 50/2.8 AF Minolta
> >were all hard to fault despite some character differences.  However, lack of
> >floating elements in Leica and Zeiss should have limitations with reducing
> >abberations both in macro and infinity settings (Obviously so in their MTF
> >charts).  This is just theoretical....  I use a Macro Elmartit 60mm as an
> >everyday lens and am just happy with it.
> 
> I don't so much copying of flat objects, only some. But when
> photographing an object with straight lines it is often important that
> these straight lines appear that way in the photograph.
> 
> My guess is that all these lenses are good. I just wonder if anyone has
> direct experience with the Leica and is it better? Or the Zeiss, orS
> 
> Henry Ambrose

Like shooting your black and white prints with slide film to make slides.
A common use for me.
Mark Rabiner

In reply to: Message from Henry Ambrose <digphoto@nashville.net> (Re: [Leica] 60 Macro)