Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'll add to what Ernie said by saying it also has vertical distortion. It is a lens that should have stayed on the drawing board. Jeffery At 12:11 PM 7/19/2003 -0400, you wrote: >I'd add to what Jeffrey has said by suggesting that you stay away from >voigtlander 50/2.5 - cute lens but very blurry in my opinion. > >ernie >On Saturday, July 19, 2003, at 11:46 AM, Jeffery L. Smith wrote: > >>If you are not that concerned with speed (i.e., shoot outdoors mostly), >>the Tri-Elmar (28, 35, and 50) is a great carrying-around lens. If speed >>is a concern, I would suggest (1) used Leica glass, (2) new Voigtlander >>glass, and (3) new Leica glass, in that order. The order is dictated only >>because of price. That said, I think (1) and (2) will have similar >>optical quality and similar price. The LUG *is* biased toward Leica >>glass, so I might get flamed a bit for this. >> >>Regarding Voigtlander glass, a good threesome for indoor shooting would be: >> >>28/1.9 >>35/1.7 or (if you can afford it) 35/1.2 >>50/1.5 >> >>Voigtlander doesn't have a fast 90. You'll have to go to Leica for that. >> >>Jeffery Smith > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html