[Leica] 180/4 lens: was LUG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 64

[langhans at compwrx.com (Aram Langhans)]

I own a 4/180 also.  Here are a few shots with it in tricky lighting 
situations.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/Arams-Photos/white_dogwood_backlit
http://gallery.leica-users.org/Arams-Photos/pink_dogwood_backlit
http://gallery.leica-users.org/Arams-Photos/Pink_dogwood_backlit_dark

I find the lens to be a fine performer.  Light, compact.  I do not have a 
different 180 to compare it to, and I am sure Feli is correct in his 
assessment, but if you rarely need that focal length, and f-4 is not a 
problem for you, I think this lens is a great deal and would highly 
recommend it.  I shoot it on an R8 and an R4 and mostly on a tripod.  Have 
hand held it on the R4 and it was not a problem for me.  Here are some 
hand-held shots.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/Arams-Photos/woodduck
http://gallery.leica-users.org/Arams-Photos/mallard

In the full image, the texture and patterns on the feathers are quite clear. 
Perhaps a different 180 would even be better.


Aram


> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 02:01:53 -0700
> From: feli <feli2@earthlink.net>
> Subject: [Leica] PAW June 22, 2005
> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
> Cc: feli di Giorgio <feli2@earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <4A1417C7-DF54-4F99-A94D-CA9B9571601C@earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> PAW June 22, 2005
>
> Two new shots here, both taken with the 4/180 Elmar-R:
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/88sw8
>
>
>
>
> I've been putting my recently acquired 4/180 Elmar-R through it's
> paces and here are some observations.
>
> The 4/180 is light and compact. Mounted on a R6.2 it will even fit in
> a Domke 803. For me it handles better on the SL, than R6.2. My hands
> are on the large side and I find the smallish R6.2 a little difficult
> to hold, with a long lens. If I add the motor, I'm ok. Today I went
> out with just the R6.2 body, no motor.
>
> The lens weighs about 500 grams, so it's rather light for a 180. This
> makes it a little difficult to hold steady, when it is mounted on a
> light body.
>
> Optically it's ok, Not bad, but not great either. I shot some APX100
> and Tri-X, handheld and on a tripod, across a range of stops. What I
> found was a low/med contrast image, without much 'bite'. So far, this
> lens doesn't have the snap I see in my other Leica glass. It's
> signature reminds me of the Japanese lenses I owned back in the early
> 90's.
> Not bad, but not great either. Leica has spoiled me.
>
> The shot of the girl feeding the pigeons was taken at f5.6 and
> 1/500th, from about 15 yards away. The fine textures in her clothing
> and in the feathers of the birds are simply not there. It's almost as
> if past a certain frequency, information is being clipped. Stopping
> down, doesn't seem to improve performance.
>
> I compared the 4/180 shots to material I took with my 2.8/180 Elmarit-
> R (thin) and the Elmarit appears to beat the Elmar hands down. The
> Elmarit resolves more detail and the image has more bite. There is no
> contest between either of these lenses and the 3.4/180, 2.8/180 APO
> and 2/180 Summicron, any of which will eat both for breakfast and ask
> for seconds. The current Nikon 2.8/180 ED easily beats the 4/180
> Elmar. I'm not sure how it stacks up against an early version of the
> Nikon.
>
> The corners look a little soft, but I need more samples to make an
> accurate judgment.
>
> Bokeh appears to be nice and smooth.
>
> The 4/180 focuses closer than the 2.8/180 Elmarit-R (thin), which is
> nice.
>
> The Elmar seems to be reasonably flare proof and the built in hood is
> deep.
>
> Did I mention how nice and compact this lens is?
>
>
> Here's my verdict, so far:
>
> If you are looking for compact, light weight 180, this is pretty much
> the only choice, since all the other 180's are bigger.
>
> If you are shooting 400 asa film on the street and printing 8x10, it
> may turn out to be ok.
>
> I think this may turn out to be a very nice portrait lens, due to
> it's gentler rendering of very fine details (i.e. pores, blemishes etc)
>
>
> This is not the lens for you if:
>
> If you are shooting animals ala Doug Herr and want razor sharp results.
>
> If you are looking to make detail filled 11x14 prints.
>
>
>
>
> So far, that's the story. I'm going to keep shooting with it and
> we'll see what happens.
>
>
>
>
> Feli
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________
> feli2@earthlink.net                 2 + 2 = 4
> www.elanphotos.com
>
>
> no archive
>
>