Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: Re: [Leica] M & R lens differences
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 17:50:17 -0600
 
At 06:36 PM 12/13/97 +0100, you wrote:

>M                      R
>3.4/21 SA       >    4/21 SA
>2.8/21 asph     ?    2.8/21 PC SA
>2.8/28          <    2.8/28
>2/35            >    2/35
>1.4/35          <    1.4/35
>2/50 (pre cur.) <    2/50
>2/50            =    2/50
>1.4/50          >    1.4/50
>2/90            <    2/90
>
>... in my impression.
>Alf

Alf,

Where did you see a 21 2.8 R lens? You mean the 19? Or the 21 f/4? That's a
great lens, almost no falloff. But slow. Viewfinder is dark. Or do you mean
the 28mm PC SA? I hear it's great.

My incluson would be:

M                         R
35 1.4 ASPH   >  35 Summilux (a tiny bit difference)
90 2.8             =  90 2.8 (currents)
135 2.8           =  135 2.8
Everything       <  100 Apo Macro Elmarit R (joke)
==========

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch

Police tagline.  Do not cross.