Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/10

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

Subject: [Leica] Canon/Leica lenses (was Re: Leica Nomenclature)
From: Simon Ogilvie <simon_ogilvie@ionica.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:19:26 +0100

On Fri 5th (OK I know I'm a bit behind!), Eric Welch wrote:
>...  I hear the Zeiss 300 2.8 Tele
> APO Tessar is a tad better than the 280 2.8, but not by much! The Canon 300
> 2.8 is right between them. ...

I take it the Canon 300/2.8 is known to be a bit special then?
I was looking at the Canon EF L lens brochure recently, and
I was interested in Canon's mtf graphs.  The 300/2.8 is good,
undoubtedly, but it and all the other L lenses seem to pale by
comparison to the 180/3.5 Macro lens.  Has anybody used 
this lens and compared it to the equivalent focal lengths in
Leica's R range?  Is it really as exceptional as these graphs
would indicate?

I currently own a Leica M system, and a Canon EOS system
(no Leica R), and I use the EOS system for areas in which
the M struggles, such as longer teles and macros, so this
information would be particularly pertinent to me.

Thanks,
Simon.