Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 03:54 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote: >And I also consider my 135mm to be a very useful focal length for my M >system. Thanks, Mark. I'll probably take mine, too. >My 35 is the Summicron ASPH >My 75 I don't have. Someday but I think the new small one. The 75/1.4 is one of my favorite lenses. >Its history which hasn't gotten around to happening yet. >21 and 24 ASPH's big but basic pieces of enabling gear for me. >They were expensive but when I reach into my camera bag for one a little >voice does not cry out asking for more money. >You'd bring 2 35's!!? Yes! I like the 35/1.4 for low-light B&W photos. The 35/2 ASPH is the absolute best lens for color that I have. >The 50/1.0 Noctilux I'm with you on as well of course. A Leica edge. >And my 90 is the new one but I kept my old one which is the Elmarit current. Mine is actually the 2.0. I typed that wrong. I don't often use it wide open, but it is still a great lens. >If you were buying stuff now would half your stuff be Cosina Voigtl?nder and >Cosina Zeiss? Absolutely not! The only reason I buy Leica bodies is to be able to use Leica lenses! I bought the Voigtlander - actually 12 and not 15 - to experiment with ultra-wide angles not available from Leica. It's really a specialty lens that requires lots of light. It's tiny enough that I can carry it just in case I might need a really wide angle. But I have no plans to buy any other lens that is not a Leica. When I compare what I get with Leica lenses with even the best Canon L lenses, there is no contest. I do like the auto-focus as I get older, but I have to spend much more time correcting distortion, fringing, aberrations, etc. with the Canon lenses. You get what you pay for, I guess. Tina Tina Manley ASMP, NPPA, EP, PI http://www.tinamanley.com