Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Especially in low light and wide open, it seems to me that reflex equipment would be a much better choice, even at the obvious sacrifice of size and noise. But chaque un a son gout, If you believe the 135/2.8 is your only choice, there is no reason to discuss the matter here. Regarding Erwin's evaluation of anything Leica...my money and my interest are directed elsewhere.. Buzz On 1/4/08 5:37 PM, "Michiel Fokkema" <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl> wrote: > Hi Buzz, > > There were three versions. > First one only for M. > Second version for M and R but this version seems to be very close to > version 1. Therefore I call this version 1/2. > Version 3 for M and R are the same optical. So, performance wise the R > and M lens are the same! Please check > here:http://www.imx.nl/photo/download.html > and download Erwin's book. (and make a donation) > I'm working on a project with very low light for which I sometimes need > a longer focal length. The 135/2.8 is the only choice. I know the Tele > elmar is better but every stop counts even when using fast film. > > Cheers, > > Michiel Fokkema