Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for the insights....I think I have narrowed my decision down to the 19, 28, or 35. At 09:22 PM 3/4/98 -0600, you wrote: >Francesco wrote: > > >19/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.0 >> >>I would greatly appreciate any thorough comments, personal experiences, >>or just plain advice that would assist me in selecting a wide-angle lens. >>The critical factor for me when selecting a Leica lens is quality > >I have only had experience with the 24/2.8 and the 35/2.0 R lenses and >found them both to be very fine performers. I was especially impressed >with the 35/2.0. I had heard that it was a good lens - but it was better >than I expected. I believe that it is a better lens, in some respects, >than the 35/2.0-M lenses, which is one of my favorites. I saw very little >coma with the R lens, virtually non, into the corners - much more with the >M. I think that the 35 is a very versatile lens. I also was surprised >with the 24 - made by Minolta I believe with Leica controls. It was very >sharp and contrasty. > >I didn't have these too long but I really like both of them > >Dick Hemingway >Norman, OK > Francesco Sanfilippo, Five Senses Productions webmaster@5senses.com http://www.5senses.com/