Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I haven't used the Leica 180 2,8, but it would have to get up pretty early to best the Nikon 180 2.8 ED....which is a really amazingly sharp lens, easy to handle, with very nice BOW KAH! > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Julian > Thomas > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 1:54 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: 180 crap?? (was:Re: [Leica] Re: Best Hadow and Highlight > Metering) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Doug Herr" <telyt560@cswebmail.com> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 6:11 PM > Subject: 180 crap?? (was:Re: [Leica] Re: Best Hadow and Highlight > Metering) > > > > > > I'm curious which 180 qualifies as crap ... I understand the expensive > part. > > > > Sorry Doug, a bit of a too-quick email. I was doing a lot of theatre stuff > and wanted a 2.8 180 on a mechanical body with a good spot meter. I've > always used OMs but loved the R6. At the time the leica 2.8 very stiff and > awkward to use. I tried both and the Olympus was sharper and > easier to focus > and handhold at low light levels. I couldn't justify the price of a leica, > especially considering I was shooting without flash, usually at > 30/60th sec > wide open on tmax 3200. Neither gave me the same quality as the Nikon 2.8, > but the Nikon bodies were just too noisy. This all about 10 years > ago before > the leica asph 180. > > Julian > >