[Leica] Is macro at 35mm focal length sensible?

[leica_r8 at hotmail.com (Aram Langhans)]

Try that again.  I hit the wrong key, I guess.

Late to the party as I have been traveling for a few weeks.

Here is a macro taken with the 35-70/4 on a Nikon D7000 in Zion a few days 
ago.  It was shot wide open (f-4) as those flies were really moving around 
and I wanted a fast shutter.  Took quite a few that ended up in various 
planes of focus, but this was the best

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Aram/misc/Zion-5204.jpg.html

View large, please.

I often carry this lens on hikes because it does a respectable job of 
semi-macro work and weighs a lot less than my 100 APO.  I just spent $350 
getting it fixed after a drop, so now it is back in my pack and I can leave 
my HEAVY 24-120/4 Nikon in the car.  The 35-70 outperforms it by far, even 
if it is lacking in the zoom range and autofocus.

My first macro lens was the 40mm Kilar on my Rollei SL-35, so while longer 
focal lengths are indeed easier to use, macro can be done at the shorter 
range.  So, get out and try that lens for close up stuff and see how good it 
is.  Not much will out perform it or be more versatile in that focal length 
range.

Aram

-----Original Message----- 
From: Vick Ko
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 5:31 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: [Leica] Is macro at 35mm focal length sensible?

I'm trying to find reasons to keep my 35-70 f4 Leica  R zoom.

Is macro at 35mm focal length sensible?

Are there those who love this lens?

Vick