Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/09

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

Subject: [Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2010 18:14:21 -0400

Because I know that a 250 on a Hasselblad is a is a 180 on a Leica.


--------------------
Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
mark at rabinergroup.com


> From: Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 09:46:16 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens
> 
> Mark.. are you talking about an enlarged print or the actual "negative"?
> Given that the lensescome from Leica and Zeiss, lens quality is probably
> pretty equal... YOu might want to ask POP PHOTO to do a lens 
> comparison.....
> 
> WHy do you think a 1600mm would have a much larger magnification than a 
> 1700?
> The difference is 100/1600 or roughly 6%??
> 
> Frank
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
>> Sent: Oct 9, 2010 1:41 AM
>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens
>> 
>> Will I'd think somebody could do the math and then they do and you're 
>> right
>> and I'm wrong I'll concede.
>> But my  money goes to Leica is going to have not a slightly more
>> magnification. But a lot more.
>> You read it here first.  Its in writing. Right here.
>> Prove me wrong I'll eat crow with Bosco.
>> 
>> --------------------
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> Photography.
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>> mark at rabinergroup.com
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net>
>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 23:46:09 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens
>>> 
>>> Not quite correct... 1600 or 1700mm .... about the same FL and
>>> magnification.
>>> 
>>> The difference is in the recorded angle of view....
>>> The Leica is set for 35mm, the Zeiss for 6x6.
>>> The angle of view on  the Leica lens is about half .... only because the
>>> Leica
>>> Film is recording the center of the image....
>>> 
>>> Frank
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Not sure how you interpreted what I wrote.  The Leica lens will
>>>> magnify more.  A lot more.
>>>> 
>>>> Marty
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens)
In reply to: Message from red735i at earthlink.net (red735i at earthlink.net) ([Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens)