Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 13:52 22/08/00 -0400, you wrote: >Which ones don't? It is true that Minolta makes a slew of budget minded >consumer oriented lenses (as do Nikon and Canon etc.), but their "serious" >lenses (such as the 100/2.8 macro, the 200/2.8 APO, all their 50s, their >85/1.4 etc., etc.) are excellent lenses, and if they are less than Leica >equivalents, it will only be apparent under the most exacting test >conditions. For instance, part from it propensity to flare (but manageble >with my 100% viewfinder in my 9), I can't distinguish my Minolta 50 from >my 50 Summilux-M. > >In fact, I have some test pics taklen with my minolta 50, my Summilux 50 >and my DR 50. I will rescan them using Vuescan to try and get identical >scans, and post them.. you pick out the Minolta, if you can. Give me a day >or two to find the negatives. > >Dan C That will be interesting to look at. Can you say which Minolta 50 you are talking about- if the AF 50/1.4, is it the old or new version? Joe B.