Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/09/24

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

Subject: [Leica] R lens comparison
From: von-ohlen at sbcglobal.net (Bill Larsen)
Date: Mon Sep 24 20:02:31 2007
References: <092420070340.4527.46F731A2000A3E7B000011AF219791299503010CD2079C080C03BF970A9D9F9A0B9D09@mchsi.com>

I  agree with Gene.  I have the 35/2, 50/2 and 90/2.  From a subjective 
viewpoint, these have the same "look" as the M lenses from the same 
period.  In other words, I can't tell which system was used in the 
photos (this includes the color cast).   I also have the 21/4 SA  but 
don't have the M equivalent.  I agree with Gene about the 200/4 Telyt.  
And for really spectacular results, the 280/2.8 APO with extenders and 
close up adapter.  Haven't really seen anything  with which to compare 
this lens..  If the current R mount is viable into the future (well, 
they are with adapters to the Canon series at least), there are some 
real  bargains out there.

Regards, Bill Larsen

grduprey@mchsi.com wrote:

>Hi Jack,
>
>Well I have not used them all but those I have used are every bit as good 
>as their M counterparts.  I currently have the 24 Elmarit R, 35 Elmarit R, 
>90 Elmarit R, 135 Elmarit, 200/4 Telyt (OK not really an R lens, but this 
>Visoflex lens is really nice on the R cameras), 560 Telyt, and the 80 - 200 
>Vario Elmar R.  Would not give any up.
>  
>


In reply to: Message from grduprey at mchsi.com (grduprey@mchsi.com) ([Leica] R lens comparison)