Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/11/03

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

Subject: [Leica] Which R lenses are good? Mediocre? Bad?
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 21:46:23 +0530
References: <20057528.1446564385844.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Mistype - 75-200 f4.5 - an average performer, nowhere near the Nikon
80-200 of that era.
Cheers
Jayanand

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> 
wrote:
> Jayanand Govindaraj wrote:
>
>>>>
> a 24mm Elmarit-R and a 75-210mm zoom - neither of which I liked very much.
> <<<
>
> 75-200mm or 70-210mm?  These are both Minolta designs, the latter with 
> some Leitz input.  The 75-200 (the older of these two) didn't impress me.  
> The sharpness was OK and it has good flare control but bokeh could get 
> really funky, distortion was clearly evident and its mechanical 
> construction was not up to Leica standards.  The 80-200mm f/4 (A Leica 
> design made by Kyocera) is a much better lens.
>
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
> http://doug-herr.fineartamerica.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from geneduprey2015 at gmail.com (Gene Duprey) ([Leica] Which R lenses are good? Mediocre? Bad?)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Which R lenses are good? Mediocre? Bad?)