Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/08/26

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

Subject: [Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank)
From: red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:33:35 -0700
References: <CAK1iPBTKEUQuHzek1o3+nDPKELCKYmssr7zASH_0x6xN=mdA2A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJj7xs8f=zDVf+ZjUV4VwomRUQuC0-yw2NHg+vybg3Wv7mgwpA@mail.gmail.com> <0aed01cfc0e5$c40b4370$4c21ca50$@verizon.net> <18DC99E8-8E75-4F7C-B020-2703F07BE0C7@gmail.com> <0b0501cfc0ee$d8a95840$89fc08c0$@verizon.net> <7536389F-1B45-4E9A-91C2-5627666C82B5@btinternet.com>

You should see the bathtub!

The Tamron was bought some time back.  It was, at that time, a cult lens....
reportedly as sharp as the Nikon at 1/3 the price.  I bought mine used.  It
is still a cult lens for MF shooters.  BTW, it now sells for (used) roughly
5-10% of the price of a new, Nikon 300 F2.8 with all the bells and whistles
Since I do not shoot fast moving objects, (and I am not a pro trying to make
a living at photographing high speed sports, birdies, or races,) I get to
keep my marriage intact and have a few bucks more in the retirement account.

Until the marriage with the D7100, I was not aware of how sharp it was....
I compared it to my Sigma 400 f5.6 APO (another cult lens) and the Tamron
runs circles around it wide open even.  The Sigma IS lighter by about a
factor of 3.... !  That F2.8 is just plain a killer on the back.

Compared with the Telyt 400 F6.8 (Visoflex model), it is not quite as sharp.
The CA in the Leica glass is better, but the Tamron is not bad.  However
what you lose in sharpness you make up for in focus-ability and accuracy.
The trade off choice you must make when your ground glass is dark, and not
optimized for manual focusing.

I do not have any of the other lenses you mention....  I only wish.....

Frank Filippone
Red735i at verizon.net

Like it. Very amusing. Boy, is it big though. You would need a pretty big
bathroom to get that in.

By the way, are you pleased with your voltage Tamron 300/2.8 SP LDIF AD2
lens? I had one for quiet a while. In fact, for a while I owned the Tamron,
a Leica 280/2.8 APO (non modular) and 280/4 APO Telyt at the same time. To
be honest, there was very little between the tamron and the 280/2.8 APO. The
280/4 APO was better though.

Best wishes,

Charlie

www.charlie-chan.co.uk

On 26 Aug 2014, at 06:30, Frank Filippone <red735i at verizon.net> wrote:

> You want me to help proliferate the cult of the Giant Rubber Duckie?
> 
> What is this world coming to......
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/FrankF/DSC_4257.jpg.html
> 
> Does anyone have a big pin I could borrow?
> 
> 
> Frank Filippone
> Red735i at verizon.net




In reply to: Message from ausdlk at gmail.com (David Lykes Keenan) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))
Message from dennis.leicam6 at gmail.com (Dennis Kushner) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))
Message from rgacpa at gmail.com (Bob Adler) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))
Message from topoxforddoc at btinternet.com (Charlie Chan) ([Leica] Rings Contraption, Santa Monica, 2012 (to Bob & Frank))