[Leica] Comparing legacy Nikon lenses to Leica R lenses on the Sony A7II 70-200 range

[Don Dory]

Chiming in, the Canon 300 2.8 L FD can be had fairly inexpensively and is
very crisp.  CA where found is easily removed in the software of your
choice.  Still very usable with the 2X B Canon converter.  The Nikon 400
3.5 mf ai lens is also very good and also relatively affordable.  If you
have the Leica 180 3.4 it is more than good screech with 50+mm of extension
tube attached.  If you are on a budget you can find the Canon LTM 28 3.5,
35 1.8, 50 1.8 or 1.4, and 85 2.0 for very good prices.  All are very good
lenses although not up to lenses ten times their acquisition cost.

Wide angles should probably be newer designs and designed for a mirror
system.  I have had surprisingly good results from the old 21 3.4 Super
Angulon especially at close focusing distances.  The Zeiss 21 2.8 for the
Contax G system is small and quite good.

Of course if learning the muscle memory to use magnified focus is too time
consuming for your subject matter then the acquisition of native lenses is
a wise course of action.  Modern AF is amazingly good most of the time.
Where it fails is when you needed the point of focus to be exactly on a
very small part of your subject and you have no DOF.

All the best.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 9:37 AM Tina Manley via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
wrote:

> +1!
>
> The 90-280 SL APO is a spectacular lens!!  All of the SL lenses I have are.
>
> Tina
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:50 PM, Doug Herr via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Frank Filippone wrote:
> >
> > >Sounds like Doug looked into the Dark Side and the reflection came up
> > with a
> > >Sony Lens.....
> > >I was wondering what you thought of the Sony 100-400.  How did it
> compare
> > to
> > >the 280 APO?
> > >Or was it an issue of more convenience outweighed the IQ differences,
> > which
> > >must have been reasonably small.....?
> >
> > Convenience is certainly a factor.  I don't think of it as a 100-400
> zoom,
> > it's more like a 400mm lens that allows a wider field of view if a
> critter
> > is unexpectedly close.
> >
> > When I bought the lens I had flashbacks to VW's television ads in the
> late
> > 1960s, when they first started selling beetles with an automatic
> > transmission: "Volkswagen takes a giant leap into the present".  Stealing
> > from the 'total immersion' method of learning a foreign language I've
> used
> > it almost exclusively for the last few months.  The AF has taken some
> > getting used to.  It scores big on convenience except when it doesn't
> i.e.,
> > picks the wrong target like a distant background instead of the bird on a
> > twig 10' away.  I can say that it's quick and accurate when it picks the
> > right target and there's never any of the AF micro-adjustment BS that
> most
> > DSLR users take for granted.
> >
> > Optically: if I'd never seen how good a lens can be I'd be delighted with
> > it.  No bad habits at any focal length or aperture, quite sharp,
> > unobtrusive bokeh, no sign so far of ugly flare.  The thing is, I've seen
> > how good a lens can be (280/4 R APO, 90-280 SL APO).
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Tina Manley
> www.tinamanley.com
> tina-manley.artistwebsites.com
>
> http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>