Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: 180/3.4 & 180 2.0
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 09:10:41 -0800

At 07:41 AM 11/10/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Jim Brick wrote:
>
>The very reasons I kept my 180/2.8 when I got my 70-180. I really like
>my
>180/2.8 . Ounce for ounce, I believe it's one of the finest 180's
>available.
>
>Jim...
>
>To quote Yoda, "No, there is another..."
>
>I newly have the 180 2.0 Apo Summicron, a hoss of a lens, that I'm just
>learning to use. Have only shot a half dozen rolls thus far, and had
>intended to report to the group when I had developed some more formed
>opinions.
>
>Early impressions (no news here) is that the lens is v. sharp, easy to
>focus on the R8, fun to shoot wide open (just shot half a roll on a
>cloudy day at 2.0, for fun), close focuses to +/- 4 feet, and wide open
>has HIGHLY limited depth of field. 
>
>FWIW, this lens was the highest scoring ColorFoto ever tested (no mean
>feat?) and the mechanical quality certainly is there. Feels like a chunk
>of granite. Have been using a monopod and both hands to carry the combo.
>To date, though, I've been very impressed.
>
>More when I know more, in a few months.
>
>David W. Almy

Of course, you are correct. But that's why I said "ounce for ounce". For
the size & weight, the 180/2.8 is a fantastic lens. For somewhat *more*
weight, the 180/2.0 is better. I don't have one, but that's what they say.

Jim