Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 vs. Canon 50/1.2 vs. Summilux 50/1.4
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:28:42 -0700
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030913170845.037e2980@192.168.100.11> <000b01c37a59$0dbd65a0$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net>

Ted Grant wrote:
> 
> Richard F. Man wondered:
> 
> > Yes, one of the perpetual comparison question. Which one is "best" wide
> > open at 1.4, and how soft is the Canon at 1.2?
> >
> > Looks like there's a Nikkor 1.4 and a Canon 1.2 for sale right now, I am
> > somewhat tempted....
> 
> Aw gee whiz Richard, save yer dollars, go Noctilux and get the best! ;-)
> 
> Then you have eliminated the quandary of which is best between two lesser
> lenses! ;-)
> 
> Now I've said that I'll assume there'll be incoming for a bit! ;-)
> 
> ted
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Yea what's half a stop between friends!


A grand and a half?

The Nikon 1.2 a washout while some experts with the initials of Erwin
equate Canon's F1 (pun) with ours. Or better. Time for a indented front
element for the Noct again and the initials Asph. Like lots of Asph I'd
think. But we don't want to make an.....no i can't.

I think our older formulas invite question. Younger kick ass like all
hell. That's why I'm here. Although you guys are ok.


Mark Rabiner
Portland, Oregon USA
http://www.rabinergroup.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "John Evensta" <jevensta@plateautel.net> ([Leica] Another Summitar picture)
In reply to: Message from "Richard F. Man" <richard@imagecraft.com> ([Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 vs. Canon 50/1.2 vs. Summilux 50/1.4)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 vs. Canon 50/1.2 vs. Summilux 50/1.4)