Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/07/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Modern >Zeiss glass will cost and cost and cost, though the G2's 16mm Hologon seems >to be appearing on quite a few M's. Granted, $400 is a bit steep for the adaptor, but you are mistaken about the price of most Zeiss lenses for the G camears. The 16 f/8 Hologon is the most expensive, but the 21 f/2.8 Biogon is only $1200 from B&H... less than my new 35mm Summicron, and half the price of the comparable Leica lenses. The other G lenses, are in my opinion, complete steals, after having used them for several months. The 90mm f/2.8 Sonnar is only $520, yet was called the best medium tele they'd every tested when Popular Photography put it and the 45 and 28 lenses through their paces (April 1995). The 45mm f/2 Planar is only $340, and the 35mm f/2 is only $470. If you go with Zeiss lenses, even if you pay $400 for the viewfinder, you will still be payiing a lot less than Leica glass and getting quite similar quality. Having used both glasses, though, it seems that M glass like my 35 Summicron has a slightly warmer tone than the 35 or 90 G glass. All three lenses produce noticably better contrast and sharpness when compared with other photos.