[Leica] 90/2.8

[Guy Bennett <guybnt@idt.net>]

>Guy
>
>>>i handled the 75/1.4 for the first time, and was surprised - it wasn't as
>heavy as i expected! i too use the 90/2.8, i've got one in chrome, and
>apparently the weight is identical (maybe that's why the 75 didn't feel
>*too* heavy).
>
>the price is pretty heavy, however.<<
>
>I agree. The lens doesn't seem heavy. It's just a tad too big, and the
>cost, as you say, is significant. Plus, I don't very often find myself
>wishing for a tele faster than the 90/2.8.
>
>Dave


dave,

the 90/2.8 is the biggest lens i've got (though the 24 is hefty, it seems a
bit smaller to me). to my hand and eye, it seems perfect on an m body - the
length and weight are in no way cumbersome - it balances beautifully - and
i find myself enjoying it more and more.

that said, the issue of size and weight has never come up when i've been
deciding on a lens. i mean, if i felt i couldn't live without the extra
stop, i would've come up with the extra cash for the 90 summicron. having
now fiddled with the 75, i didn't have a problem with what it weighed or
how much of the vf it blocked (very little, imo). what stops me there is: 1
- - the focal length - a little to close to the 50 for me, and i wouldn't
give that lens up. 2 - the price. while i've blown a lot of money on leica
gear, i've gotta say that i just couldn't justify spending upwards of $2500
on a lens.

oddly enough, while i frequently shoot in low light i never really miss the
extra stop(s) of the summicron 90 and the 75. with the 35 and 50
summicrons, f/2 has generally been fast enough for me. (but i'll bet if i
used them for any length of time, i wouldn't want to live without them
afterward!)

guy