Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/05/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm sorry about this basic question and if you think it's just too basic, I would appreciate you replying privately. I finally got into the mood to get started up VERY slowly with a Leica R-system, when I found a good-looking R4s in a store in my hometown. I'm already decided on that one, because the guys in the store told me, that the R4s is much more reliable than the R4 (I hope, that's true). So now I'm a bit confused which lens to go for (and unfortunately it can be just ONE for the moment): They offer me an older Elmarit-R 35/2.8 which sticks on a Leicaflex SL at the moment. It hasn't got the hood on it and I think it is a S.6 or so. The other thing (a bit more expensive, but that would be ok) is a Summicron-R 50/2 E55. I'm leaning towards the 35, because it's cheaper and it is more versatile (I plan to add a 90/2.8 as soon as I can, so the step-up from the 50mm lens wouldn't be that much). Since I own a Nikon system with a lot of primes, I'm looking for real differences in terms of image quality in the Leica system (it wouldn't make too much sense to invest into it otherwise, would it?!). I'm looking for those differences you guys are always enthusing about. The MTF results at photodo go for the 50/2 (4,5 vs. 4,0). But what are MTF results compared to Leica-user experiences?! I would appreciate if you would help me out here! I would also appreciate any related links! Thank you in advance, Wolfgang - ---------------- Wolfgang Spekner A-8041 Graz / Austria / E.U. http://gewi.kfunigraz.ac.at/~faber/