Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Felix, I too have many Canon lenses dating back to 1948. Almost all of them are very well built, especially the mid-production FD breech lock and the EOS L lenses that I own. I have owned both the 1.8 and the 1.4 versions of the current EOS lenses: I am not really exaggerating about the build quality or optical performance of either current lens. When I use a 50 in the EOS system I currently use a late production AI Nikon 1.4 with an adapter. In no way was I trying to say the EOS lens line up was not of good to great quality, just that the fast 50's left something to be desired. Don don.dory@gmail.com On 12/20/06, F?lix L?pez de Maturana <FELIXMATURANA@telefonica.net> wrote: > > > > > but people > > who are used to lenses that might last a couple of years wouldn't touch > them > > unless they could carry a few spares. :) > Hi Don > > I think the right English word is exaggeration. I own, besides eight SLR > Canon -five if them digital-, a vwery significant bunch of Canon lenses > some of them with more than 20 years and the only who needed service was > the 16mm f2.8 fisheye, by far the less used. I agree the building > quality is not the Leica one, but they are not crap at all and if full > open they have not the figures of vignetting, sharpness, distortion, etc > of Leica lenses you just need close some stop to get very good outputs > as many, many photographers do perfectly know. I have too the Noctilux > and it's an extraordinary lens for his *features* much more than for his > *performances*. So often our tools are better than our skill. > > Regrads. > > F?lix > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >