Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]"B. D. Colen" wrote: > > I admit to not knowing a thing about the reflexes beyond what I read here > and in reviews, and from the impressions I've gotten handling the R8...N > cameras I know a little something about, owning a battered F, and having at > various times owned an F Photomic, and later an F3, and having shot with my > son's F5..... > I will say that anyone but Erwin would be hard pressed to tell me that > images I've gotten with my old F and the 180 2.8 ED would be bested by the R > lens equivalent.... : o) ..Just as they aren't going to be able to tell me > that anything will beat what the M with the 35 SUmmilux ASPH can do.. > I'd hate to go up against Leica in the 180 department. This is the focal length if I remember right commissioned in its first higher speed form for the famous '32 Olympics for Leni R. So its a perhaps established lineage. I would think there would be people who would think the Germans "owned" that focal length. They'd be wrong though of course, the Nikon you speak of is no doubt an enviable chunk of glass. And of course the lens design could be the same. Mark Rabiner