Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 08:40 AM, you wrote: >For cameras I have been most pleased with the Leicaflex SL.=A0 I find the >focusing screen particualrly well-suited to these longer lenses, and even a >bit brighter and smoother than the screen in the R-4SP and the R-6.=A0 The= SL's >are solid, reliable, and again, available at a reasonable price ($450-550)= in >decent shape.=A0 For metering, I use an incident meter. I agree with you on the 400 6.8 being a great lens, but the SL is not the best choice for shooting soccer. It has no motor. The SLMOT is not a good choice either, too big and clumsy, and expensive! I've seen an R4sP in the current Shutterbug for $395. Worth every penny! And a Motor R for $299. A grip for the motor R costs $75 and is worth it. Nice cheap outfit to run a Leica lens on.=20 As for the maximum aperture of this lens, it has only two air-to-glass surfaces, and the light loss is minimized by that. Makes it pretty much the equivalent of a 5.6 lens from other manufacturers that have more air-to-glass surfaces. I had one and only sold it when I got a 280 2.8. Long ago, and I still miss the 280. Glen Chambers, a well-known wildlife photographer in Missouri is using it now, and promised if he ever sells it to offer it to me for the price he paid for it. (Boy, I hope he remembers!) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch I'm still not sure if I understand ambiguity.