Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2019/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The 24-70 I'd maybe start out with even though it?s a tad big but not really huge. A classic normal zoom I'm very fond of though many serious shooters hate them. I'm ok with a standard zoom all day out shooting with no other lens in my side bag. I have a 24-85 on my camera now. Though it gives me a 35-130 with the crop factor. I actually use to use a 35-135 lens shooting film an early AF. It?s a classic lens from all I can see. Nowadays the main lenses sold in the cropped formats are idiot zooms do all be all from ultra-wide to ultra-tele. I keep looking for more conservatively designed ones which are more compact with less than a million elements in them. I still think a zoom for each category is the way I like to go. Wide, standard and tele. Robert I love my newish 50mm 1.8G its not super compact but is super light weight. Super sharp. Super cheap. Super classic. A darned shame the 35 1.8 could not be made more compact. -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer ?On 1/15/19, 11:37 PM, "LUG on behalf of Robert Baron via LUG" <lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of lug at leica-users.org> wrote: Mark, as I understand it the big lenses for compact mirrorless bodies are big because of the autofocus mechanical innards they require. I would enjoy my new Nikon Z6 a whole lot more if I had a much smaller lens to put on it that would still autofocus and I hope and think that such will be available in the next little while. In the meantime in addition to the 24-70 f4 zoom that is a right nice 'kit' lens I bought the prime 50mm 1.8. It is no pancake but at least it doesn't extend itself beyond all propriety and gives me a focal length that brings back memories of the fifties and HCB. On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:00 PM Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > I think I'm seeing both sides of the new lens sizes issue a little bit. > After years with the tight restraints of designing glass for the M system > Peter Kolb and others lens designers seem to be having a ball with the > generous lens mounts in the new mirrorless cameras giving them true room to > breathe. They are way wider than Nikon F, And Canon etc. established from > the early SLR days though they didn?t have to worry about blocking a > viewfinder window. Nikon is celebrating by coming out with a .95 lens soon > called a Noctilux I'd have thought that would be a Leica trademark. So they > are also having a ball with the huge new mounts. > In the past year or so I've re bought Nikon 1.8 primes in 35, 50, 85 focal > lengths and which are as if someone inflated them with a bicycle pump. > They are inflated and hollow feeling. The filter sizes are several sizes > larger than the 52mm standard size of the classic SLR's. They don't look > ill proportioned on the DSLRS they are designed for though and balance > perfectly and better than my old compact D glass for the most part. So even > on small old mounts lenses are designed way more generously than before. > All the elements have room to breathe. > > That said these huge zoom lenses made now to put on the front of the new > flat, compact mirrorless cameras I'm not sold on getting myself. Getting > into mirrorless I'd use Leica M glass and a Nikon Z lens would have to be > of near pancake proportions for me to bite. I think maybe one is so far. > I'm not going to mount an air to ground missile on the front of scaled down > compact cutting edge designed camera body.. Might just ruin the unobtrusive > feeling of the body design. Part of good lens design to me is to not lose > sight right in the beginning what the camera system is supposed to be all > about. Mirrorless to me seems to not be about metal munching monsters. But > compactness and flexibility. And video. And keeping up with the Joneses. > > > > > -- > > Mark William Rabiner > Photographer > > ?On 1/15/19, 6:30 PM, "LUG on behalf of John McMaster" <lug-bounces+mark= > rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of john at mcmaster.co.uk> wrote: > > I was commenting on the size and weight of the SL lenses > > john > > -----Original Message----- > > I thought the discussion was about SL and M lenses. > > Jim Handsfield > jhandsfield at att.net > > > On Jan 15, 2019, at 12:55 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.uk> > wrote: > > > > They are almost S lens size and weight, but only covering 35mm > format..... > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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