Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/09

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica M vs. R lenses thought
From: TEAShea <TEAShea@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 14:52:25 EST

<<  I have been searching for a non-Nikon auto
 focus and spent a lot of time with the Canon EOS-1n.  It is much easier to
use
 than the Nikon and much quieter.  I was turned off with the seemingly cheaper
 construction and the unbelievable heft of the lenses.  I don't understand the
 need for the "L" lenses to be as heavy and bulky as they are. >>

Funny, but I was thinking about the heft of the telephoto and zoom L series
lenses last night as I was cleaning some of mine.  Particularly compared to
Leica M lenses, they are huge.   Of course the large aperture L zoom lenses
require big chunks of front glass - and many elements.  The AF mechanism also
takes some space.  

But the difference in size and wieght between comparable lenses is not so
great.  The Canon EF  50 1.8 is lighter than the M 50 2.0.  In fact the Canon
(non L) EF 135 2.8 lens is much lighter than the M 135 4.0.  Of course these
are polycarbonate lens housings, not the solid metal housings of Leica.  

The more I use and examine them, the more I am impressed with the solid
construciton of M lenses.

Tom Shea

Tom Shea