Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/07/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:00 PM 7/31/98 -0500, you wrote: >could tell immediately who's was who's. I was not shooting Leica, but >Canon. I was using a Canon 400 2.8, a lens I still have. Not including >the Leica 280 2.8 (a lens with out equal IMHO), the Canon is with out a >doubt the best long lens I have ever used. I used to use the Nikon 400 Canon long glass is superb. And the 280 2.8 is a stunningly good lens too. I owned one and regret to this day selling it to pay the rent my last semester in grad school. So....drum roll....there's a new lens on my list of all time greats. I got my 70-180 2.8 today. Took it for a spin. With 100 ISO neg film. (Gotta work, no time for play today). I must say so far two things. I photographed a '57 Chevy, and boy, howdy, this lens is sharp! It's gorgeous! It's heavy! :-) In fact, the weight is a good thing. I hand-held a portrait wide open at 1/45 of a second, and though most pictures weren't terribly sharp, I would not have expected such a good hit rate with my 180 Elmarit! The mass of this lens helps dampen the movement. Good thing to know. Certainly not going to give me pictures that this lens can potentially produce, but then often I'm facing compromises because of conditions. Good thing to know I can do this. And good to know just how wonderful this lens is! I'm looking forward to pumping some chrome through it this weekend. Again, THANKS TED!!! And sorry Tina, I'm keeping it. :-) - -- Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch Better to understand a little than to misunderstand a lot