Re: 75/1.4 -- More ramblings

[Dan Cardish <dcardish@spherenet.com>]

I've commented on my 75/1.4 to this group before, but I think I can add a
few more points.  I have the early model with the bayonet style clip-on
hood.  I've never had the problem mentioned by another with removing or
attaching the hood.  You simply push it on and twist.   Maybe I'm lucky.
I'm more worried about losing the hood.  Also, even though it is plastic, it
is quite robust and is undoubtedly lighter than a metal version.   The clip
on hood has cutouts that allows partial viewing of the bloacked out area of
the viewfinder.  It isn't perfect, but I've never been bothered by it.  I
guess it takes getting used to.

One thing I have not gotten used to is the viewfinder frame.  I
occasionally "forget" the 75 frame, and compose with the 50.  Fortunately,
there is usually enough extra space at the edges to make up for my errors.

As far as comparing it with the 90 goes, I find that at f2.8, the 75 is
definitely sharper than the 90 tele-elmarit at f2.8.  Also I seem to be able
to focus more accurately at f2.8 with the 75. I guess the shallow DOF of the
90 at 2.8 is too unforgiving.  This of course applies very much to the 75 at
larger apertures.  I use it occasionally at f2.0 for 3/4 portrait type shots
and get sharp well focused images, but normally don't use it at 1.4.  Maybe
I'm waisting the potential of the lens, but at least I know that if I need a
shot that can only be taken at 1.4, I can do it.

I've been pleased enough with the 75, and equally disappointed with the
tele-elmarit, that for me the 75 wins out.  In the back of my mind, though,
I keep wondering about the newer 90 elmarit.

Dan C.