Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B. D. Colen wrote: > > If nothing else, the G2 is living proof that it is possible to produce > extremely high quality optics - Leica quality optics - at a fraction of the > cost at which Leica produces and sells them. If Zeiss/Kyocera can produce a > 21 2.8 autofocus lens - with a viewfinder - that is at least as good as the > current Leica 21 - without a viewfinder - that can sell in the US for under > $1000, perhaps its time Leica woke up and smelled the economic coffee... B.D., That day, Leica lenses will look and feel like G lenses and I will be really sorry about that. A 21/2,8 without lens-hood. A 28/2,8, 35/2, 45/2 with symbolic lens-hoods. A 90/2,8 with a screw in lens hood (but effective). And all of them without a focusing ring. ;-) When I have a G 35/2 in one hand and a M-35/2 Asph. in the other, I know why Leica lenses are more expensive. (Or why the G are cheaper) But I agree with you about the quality of the optics (except the 35/2) even if Contax don't offer 24/2,8, 35/1,4, 50/1,4 & 1, 75/1,4, 90/2 and 135/3,4. That Hologon look great by the way. (but at a price) Lucien