Re: Opinions on 24mm Elmarit-R- in colour?

[Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>]

** Reply to note from "joe b." <joe@azurite.demon.co.uk> 12/25/95 02:30am  
+0000
> Is this lens really a Leica lens in its personality or is it simply a 
> competent but unexciting performer Leica have used to fill the gap- or 
> something in between the two?

First of all, it's not a Minolta lens, to be picky. It's parts and glass  
are made by Minolta for Leica. There is no minolta lens with these specs.  
And I've used one for years professionally. In fact, I've worn out the  
aperture several times - I bought it well used, btw. I used it a lot. It is  
a very nice lens. But then, mose manufacturers have made very nice 24mm  
2.8. The Nikon and Canon EOS models that I've seen the results from, and  
own now the latter, are beyond reproach. In fact in a conversation on CIS  
with Mike Johnston (Editor of CC&DT or whatever it is with it's new name  
(Photographic Techniques - don't have it handy) as of Jan./Feb), we have  
pretty much decided that the 24 is an above average lens in most lines. 

And as far as I was concerned, it was just fine. But it was not the equal  
of the 35 Summilux R, which is stunning, my other Leica w/a SLR lens. So  
don't worry, the difference in focal length should be a bigger  
consideration than the performance. Unless you plan to pick up a 21 or 19  
in the future, then the 28 might be a better choice. And I do hear the new  
28 is great.


Regards,

Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR