[Leica] LUG: 180 f2.0 and the ApoExtenders

["Chris Quinn" <cquinn@mail.sjcsf.edu>]

I posted this to the LUG yesterday, and it shows up on the subject/topic
list at the top of the digest, but the message wasn't down below....

So I'll try again:



> Dennis:
>
> I haven't seen any responses to this, but I'm on the digest & behind on my
> reading, so this may be redundant.
>
> The 180Summicron is also capable of taking either or both
APOtele-extenders.
> At least one gent on the list (who's probably momentarily overwhelmed with
a
> project) stacks the two extenders on his 180f2 (180, 1.4, 2.0 in that
order)
> to get a Big Fast Lens.
>
> Leica, in their Program Catalog of last year, said that with the 1.4APO on
> the 180f2, the lens had to be shot at apertures above 2.8, as the
> tele-converter was computed for the 280f2.8 and the f2.0 could show some
> vignetting. The current Program Catalog does not include this disclaimer
> (although the current one also advertises the 28f1.2, a typo repeated
> throughout the copy on the actual lens - the 28f2 - so it could just be
> another brilliant Leica advertising/promotional gaff) [ed. note: why does
> Leica have such great brochures for their binoculars, but their camera
stuff
> is inevitably some bizarre transliteration of the original High German
text?
> Does that appeal to us as buyers?].
>
> Reports on the 180Summicron say that it is a spectacular lens, but almost
> invariably point out the difficulty in hand-holding it, even with the
> grip/palm rest. Erwin states that its performance even on a monopod will
be
> compromised. The depth of field on it is, again nodding to Erwin, among
the
> shallowest of any lens, including the Nocti [has anyone done the DOF
> computation not based on distance, i.e. "@ six feet," but by magnification
> "so her head is always the same size"? This harks back to a link from two
> weeks ago...]. In combination, the weight, size, and DOF are the factors
> which contribute to Erwin's insistence on a tripod for the 180Summicron.
> Other possibilities include a chest-mounted minitripod, a belt-mounted
> monopod, a gyroscope, or a mini-Steadicam. Or you could set the thing on
the
> ground, I guess. I would like to volunteer to try this lens in all
possible
> configurations, in case you buy it but don't have the time to test it
> thoroughly.
>
> Christopher Bokeh Quinn
> Much much more on-topic than either the Filson or Mountainsmith posts
>