Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/04/09

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

Subject: [Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:31:21 +0530
References: <00d601cad739$2b6382d0$822a8870$@net> <010d01cad77d$57229b10$0567d130$@net> <55F1C43F-C146-4125-BE52-2D477346BB2C@usjet.net> <BF249C0300D748DCA9B4141513DE5D9E@jimnichols> <7E27773B9C054B028519D80A7ACFB23E@jimnichols> <0B0D6930-1E45-4EFA-9BF1-C3DBE532138E@gmail.com> <q2y3cad89991004092015v35a1ccd7h730650e5a9864072@mail.gmail.com> <k2q19b6d42d1004092053q72cbac50r54157804ec75500c@mail.gmail.com> <w2q3cad89991004092207k8c7312ckdaace1f3e1a6530d@mail.gmail.com> <g2t19b6d42d1004092221z3d4a6ba0jee7335f184b55d16@mail.gmail.com>

They are all AF, but 1st generation AF, so they are not speed demons in
focusing, but they do the job well. The new 24mmf1.4  is very, very tempting
- have you seen this:

http://www.bobkrist.com/blog/fast-wide-and-handsome/

Cheers
Jayanand

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Vince Passaro <passaro.vince at 
gmail.com>wrote:

> ooohhhh. i thought you said the only nikon MF lenses you were keeping were
> the 105 and the 55 macro.  you mean all those primes you named (50/1.4,
> 35/2, 85/1.8, 24/2.8 etc) are MF lenses or you have them all in AF? I'm
> confused. But that's nothing new. My main point was if you have the wide
> angle primes you should hold on to them. From 35 on up you'll do just as
> well or better with the newer AF and AFS lenses but I don't think that's
> the
> case among the wides.
>
> All those f2.8 zooms are the size of Folger cans ain't they? No matter.
> After 40 years of course I wouldn't blame you for keeping one camera and
> one
> lens and letting it all go. Interesting thought: what would it be?
>
> Oh, and if you're spending a little money on the Nikon folks they got a new
> 24mm f1.4 (I think it's 1.4) that looks oh so fine.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Vince,
> > I am down to 3 Nikon zooms for most of my photography - 17-55 f2.8DX,
> > 70-200f2.8 and the 200-400 f4, with the 1.4x and 1.7x teleconverters. I
> > also
> > have the 50mmf1.4, 85mmf1.8 and 180mmf2.8 which I use as a travel kit,
> and
> > my son (who also shoots Nikon) basically uses the 24mmf2.8, 35mmf2, 18-70
> > kit lens and my old 80-400 zoom. Between us I would say we have the Nikon
> > primes pretty much covered as well! I have the two MF lenses I mentioned
> > before and the Leica R 100mm APO converted to Nikon mount. There is
> really
> > too much equipment even after getting rid of a cupboard full of stuff. If
> I
> > get the full frame D700 or equivalent, I suppose I will have to get the
> new
> > 16-35 to go with it and replace my 17-55 which is a DX lens, and maybe
> > upgrade some of the primes. I also converted my old D70 to IR, but have
> not
> > given it a workout as yet. 40 years of lethargy in selling camera
> equipment
> > really comes home to roost - better to keep selling as you buy!
> > Cheers
> > Jayanand
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Vince Passaro <passaro.vince at 
> > gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Jayanand,
> > > That's an amazing list.
> > > If you get the D700 (and I can only cheer you on since I love that
> camera
> > > and hope to buy one or whatever its next generation may be and have
> > > researched it a great deal and can say, from my researches at least,
> you
> > > cannot get a better full frame camera for that money) then I'd consider
> > > holding on to a few other pieces of your Nikon glass. MF on these
> cameras
> > > is
> > > extremely easy and even working without meter is extremely easy since
> > your
> > > experienced guess will be close and you get immediate info on how to
> fine
> > > tune it.  Of your Nikon glass, if you have these, I advise keeping: any
> > of
> > > the 20mm lenses, the 24/2.8, the 28/2.0, the 28/2.8 if it's the AIs
> > > focusing
> > > to .2 m (which is the one I have; I've heard that the other is not so
> > > good).
> > > The newer 35 AFS and 85 AFS beat out their brilliant MF counterparts
> but
> > > none of those other primes do.
> > >
> > > That's my opinion anyway.
> > >
> > > Vince
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
In reply to: Message from jshul at comcast.net (Jim Shulman) ([Leica] PESO: Flipping the Bird)
Message from jshul at comcast.net (Jim Shulman) ([Leica] PESO: Flipping the Bird)
Message from robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from lluisripollquerol at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll Querol) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 3.5 cm. Elmar)