Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/29[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 08:24 PM 5/29/98 -0300, you wrote: >equivalent. I am also going to compare the Tamron with the Leica 1.4x >converter versus the Tamron with its matched converter. If the Leica one >will work with the Tamron 300 2.8, it will be one less converter to carry. You should find the lens is better with the Leica 1.4 Apo converter than with the Tamron matched converter by a long, long shot. In fact, it's better with the converter than it is alone. Now before you laugh, remember the converter takes the image out of the center of the image circle, and avoids the edges. The Tamron falls off a lot in sharpness at the edges. That converter is phenomenal. And you'll find compared to the Leica 400 2.8, if it's anything like the 280 2.8, the Tamron is a piece of junk. It's actually not a bad lens, but it can't hold a candle to the Leica long glass. - -- ========= Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO We are born naked, wet and hungry. Then things get worse.