Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2018/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I drive a 1989 Toyota Land Cruiser and I buy my clothes second-hand. I like Leica lenses and think they are almost worth what I pay for them, especially used - which is how I got this one. I do intend to use it. I've been carrying it around the farm for two days now and my arms and shoulders are fine. I also like fast lenses and am willing to put up with extra weight for extra light. That's just me. I am a serious pro. Tina On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:07 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > At first thought a 90-280mm sounds like an insanely hyper extended zoom no > pro would use but it?s just a 70-300 with the ends snipped with a cigar > cutter. > Serious shooters tend to like 80-200?s not 70-300s. But I?m ok with them. > I use them and am getting another one later this year. > What I am getting is the just out AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR > $746.95 as I trashed my earlier G version shooting upwards in the rain last > year getting some of the best shots in my life.. Just a few foggy elements > they refuse to clean it. Had I been shooting with a pro grade 80-200 2.8 it > would have been sealed and I?d still have a lens and silk long underwear. > The new out Nikon ?E? lens weights a pound and a half to the > Vario-Elmarit-SL? s 4 pounds. It will not make as sharp an image as the > $6000 Vario-Elmarit-SL but will have its moments as it?s got stuff like VR > Rated 4.5 stops improvement so you can shoot a tree in the dark hand held > with an less than a million iso and it?s got stuff no one has like an E > Electronic diaphragm and AF-P: ?Stepper autofocus motor? faster and quieter > lens both of which which others don?t have yet. For the price of the Leica > lens I can get eight of these. What I need is wool socks. Thinner ones. I > can get those too then can stop my lenses form clanging in my bag. > > I think where they went wrong with this Leica lens for the SL is making it > a f2.8-4 which is the beginning of making of a monster. Anybody walking > around with a current 80-200 2.8 AF? You?d have to have arms like Popeye. > You can settle for an f 4 or 4.5 when you?re out all day with it Some very > mouthwatering and tele zooms that no one is embarrassed about using are not > f2.8?s F 4 is the new f2.8.* But Leica?s main focus now seems to be all > about non-affordability. I you could possibly in a million years afford it > what good is it? It?s for people who drive Ferraris; Leica has said goodbye > to serious pros long ago. A serious pro could afford the body but not keep > up at all with the glass. And it?s all about the glass. And having a second > body. > > > * I could wait for more money and get the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR > for twice the cost at $1400. > Probably better sealed than the AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR > I feel like I should be able to shoot in the rain. And always have. > > > > -- > > Mark William Rabiner > Photographer > > On > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Tina Manley www.tinamanley.com tina-manley.artistwebsites.com http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html