Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/07/31

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: OT: DSLR advice....Leica glass on 20D
From: imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George)
Date: Mon Jul 31 14:46:11 2006
References: <200607311626.k6VGMxwl072191@server1.waverley.reid.org> <44CE744E.1080909@telefonica.net>

I think the the 16-35/2.8 may be one of those lenses which had good  
ones and bad ones. I was never happy with the one I had. I gave it  
about 6 months - tried it at every f-stop - never happy with even one  
frame from it. Maybe I had a lemon.

And while some speak down about the 24-70/2.8 - I seem to have a good  
one. I prefer the Leica primes in these focal lengths - but when I  
feel the need of AF and fast working zoom - this one performs  
admirably - at least my copy of it. I must say that I don't enjoy the  
size of these AF zooms with their too-large lens shades, etc. at all.



Regards,
George Lottermoser
george@imagist.com



On Jul 31, 2006, at 4:21 PM, F?lix L?pez de Maturana wrote:

> The 16-35mm f2.8 is not up to the Leica R wide zoom but much better  
> than his unjustified urban legend says. The 24-70mm and 24-105mm  
> Canon zooms seem to me formidable zooms under the point of view of  
> resolution but have lots of not vignetting or distortion,  
> fortunately repaired with PS. I like very much the Canon 100-400mm  
> IS a true comfortable zoom with his image stabilization. I regret  
> very much Leica does not go for the full frame way so my camera now  
> is the Canon EOS 5D. My 1Ds MkII is too big and too weighty. I hope  
> this help.



In reply to: Message from FELIXMATURANA at telefonica.net (Félix López de Maturana) ([Leica] Re: OT: DSLR advice....Leica glass on 20D)