Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/20

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

Subject: [Leica] Zeiss Planar 50/2 vs. latest Summicron 50/2
From: scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Date: Wed Jul 20 00:24:38 2005
References: <BF032A7B.18919%mark@rabinergroup.com>

I have the 45/2.8 AI-P too. That is one sweet lens. Can't put my finger
on it, but I just love it.  I use it on the D70 sometimes (have to use the
focus confirmation sometimes), and on an FM3a, which makes for a
really nice compact shooter. 

I really wish CV would cram the 45/2.8 into an M mount 50mm lens,
although I've been counseled here on the LUG to just get a current Leica
50/2.8 collapsible if I want an even better "tessar look" lens.

You're right, so many interesting 50's out there.

Congrats on the 105/2.5.  I like my AIS version just fine, although I 
had to go
through 2 used samples from Adorama (I'll go KEH and stay safe in the 
future).

My 135/2.8 is a great one too, IMHO (I'm told that there are better/worse
samples of this lens,  and that I probably got a good one.)  Both perform
about the same, but I really like the 105 at about f5.6 or so. Lots of 
detail
and contrast, but not harsh - like a fine archtop jazz guitar.

But lately I've been unwinding my new (to me) current Leica 90/2.8.
So far, so very, very good.

I've really got to get a bag together for my FM3a/AIS lens kit. The
28/2.8 AIS, 45/2.8 AI-P and 105/2.5 AIS is a great range of focal
lengths for me. Nothing fast, but I don't really seem to mind.

Right now the stuff sits on the shelf, and without a dedicated bag for it,
it isn't really a "grab and go" candidate.  Too bad, really.  I might send
in my D70 for servicing (minor concerns, before the Ritz "no questions
asked" warranty runs out), and then the FM3a will definitely replace
the D70 for my tripod/studio lighting shooting at least for a while.

BTW, the back hinge broke on my N80 before my g'friend inherited
it (great little camera, and the VF creams the pricier D70's much to my
dismay).  I had the Ritz NQA warranty and when it came back, it was
far, far better than new. In particular AF speed and hunting was much,
much improved.  It made me wonder if i should "break" all my Nikon
cameras soon after purchase and send them in for servicing. The list
of parts serviced on the N80 was quite extensive on the return receipt.

I've been thinking lately that Nikon glass is kind of "weird." They
have some great ones, but then some real holes in the lineup, IMHO.
I greatly prefer my CV 50/1.5 to my Nikon 50/1.8 (which most Nikonians
seem to prefer to the 50/1.4). Already, I like the 90/2.8 better than my
85/1.8 (ok, not a premo piece of Nikon glass). But in both of these cases,
the Nikon stuff is brutally sharp, but very, very clinical. And wirey bokus
maximus!   CV 35/2.5 vs. Nikkor 35/2 is a closer call. I really like the 
35/2
on the D70.

In any case, I imagine that most of Nikon's lens R&D is on zooms
these days, although I would love to be mistaken here. I pretty much
avoid zooms excepting my 12-24DX (which has pretty gruesome barrel
distortion at the wide end, I've recently experienced first hand, btw).

Actually, I'm very curious how Sigma's 30/1.4 performs. This might
make a splendid fast normal for the D70.  I also hope someone comes
out with a 60-70/2 (or so) DX prime lens with a great portrait-worthy
signature. These two primes plus the wide 12-24 zoom would make
for a great shooting kit with the D70.

Scott

Mark Rabiner wrote:

>I have nothing against CV either - today I shot only with a 45mm Nikor P
>lens made by them on a N80 which is loads of fun.
>It's my cheap digital camera which shoots film! I think they had it adapted
>special. It's sure lighter with out all that digital stuff in it!
>I tried putting a vintage 55 macro on it and it was dead in the water like
>my D100 which it emulates. Or visa versa.
>I love Nikon but from what I hear about Cosina from some acquaintances and
>friends my money would be with their glass over Nikons if it was a blind bet
>and my life depended on it. I think they may put more into it than Nikon
>does. Are more innovative in a way I like. I think Nikon is innovative and
>gives great bang for the buck but Cosina might be a little more in both
>areas.
>But Nikon makes some very cool glass which I'm very experienced with.
>I just landed a 20 year old (perfect vintage) 105 2.5 AI for the price of a
>few pairs of socks. I found the 105 macro to be too heavy for when you're
>not really needing it for macro. It's got to weight twice as much as the non
>macro. All those helical I'm sure. They'll get you every time.
>
>But by the way the 55 macros in just about any version are NOT heavy at all
>but very compact with its very recessed small air to glass built in lens
>hood kind of arrangement which I love. Although it is a 3.5.
>SLOWER THE BETTER is how I feel half the time.
>I just WILL it into focas!
>
>
>Mark Rabiner
>Photography
>Portland Oregon
>http://rabinergroup.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>  
>


Replies: Reply from jdos2 at mindspring.com (Jeff Sumner) ([Leica] Zeiss Planar 50/2 vs. latest Summicron 50/2)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Zeiss Planar 50/2 vs. latest Summicron 50/2)