Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/10/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Gee, Eric. Hope you don't buy that Canon 70-200 for $1469. That IS a rip-off! ;-) And the $1995 price for the Leica zoom is also pretty high. I picked up the Canon 70-200 2.8L from Camera World of Oregon around 5 months ago for $1250. The Leica 80-200 Vario Elmar purchased locally from Glazers in Seattle came to $1850 before tax. So, you see my 50% figure is about right. It's actually low once you factor in the $100 rebate, which brings the price down to $1150. Again, I have to say that they're about equal in my experience. I cannot see any performance difference. Even as die-hard Leica fans, we must admit that the Canon 70-200L is a fine lens. The 80-200 Vario Elmar is also quite good and, while more compact, isn't that much lighter, and only has a max aperture of f4. - --Jim - -----Original Message----- From: Eric Welch [mailto:ewelch@ponyexpress.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 1998 4:58 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] Leica R 80-200/4 zoom At 11:21 AM 10/28/98 -0800, you wrote: >Hi Carsten, >I've used this lens for a few months now and am pleased with it, although I >don't feel it's any better optically than the Canon 70-200 2.8L, which I use >more often. I'd call them about equal, except that the Canon lens is twice >as fast and costs almost 50% less. You got ripped off. It's supposed to be about 25% more, not 50%. And it weighs a whole lot less, but then an R8 would make up for it in part. :-) I just got a price on a Canon 70-200 2.8 today - $1469. The Leica is $1995, right? (I'm buying a digital outfit for a photographer - I'm NOT switching!) - -- Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch Time is just one darn thing after another. - Anonymous