Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi, For landscapes, many people choose slower lenses that are lighter to carry all day. BTW these lenses are also usually sharper than their faster counterparts. The 75/1.4 and 90/2 are fine portrait lenses, but I wouldn't want to carry their weight all day in my camera bag. The current version of the 90/2.8 is also surprisingly heavy. For the 90 in landscape I would carry the 90/4 Rokkor made the CLE. Its a very small, very light, and very sharp lens. luckily it also costs less than any of the above three. My site has info on this lens and the other lenses for the CLE at http://cameraquest.com/cle.htm The 135/2.8 is a large heavy lens also. The 135/4 Tele-Elmar is not only about half the size, but also generally considered the better lens of the two. Regards, Stephen Gandy N.Sekha wrote: > Hello, > > This is my first post to the LUG. > > I want to get a tele for my M6. There are five to consider:- > > 75/1.4 > 90/2.0 > 90/2.8 > 135/2.8 > 135/4.0 > > It will be used to shoot landscape. Sharpness and contrast are top > priorities. So which should I get? > > Thank you. > > Natasha Sekha