Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/08/15

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Non-Leica-Made Electronic M?
From: Eric Welch <>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:57:09 -0500

At 03:14 AM 8/14/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Again, this is your opinion, but IMHO, no glass from the major companies is
>"vastly better" than any of the others.  Perhaps better under an 8x loupe

No experience means an opinion with little validity. Some experience, some
validity. A lot of experience, a lot of validity. My opinion is informed,
since I've seen what a Canon 80-200 2.8, 70-200 2.8, Nikkor 80-200 2.8,
Sigma apo (yeah, right) 70-210 2.8, Tokina 70-210 2.8 and Tamron 80-200 2.8
can do. This lens eats them alive. And when I say it's vastly better, I
mean the fit and finish as well as the optics. This lens is the smoothest
lens I've ever used, M or R. Optically, it's as good as it gets. Color
character, bokeh, all wonderful.

I would have said exactly what you are saying before. How much better could
this lens be? 

It is.

For example. Someone said they thought the long throw from min. focus to
infinity was too far. But I shot some football practice today, and found
that that long throw allows very accurate follow focus. Much better than
the Nikon or Canon equivalents (not counting AF of course). It was very
easy to keep the focus just where I wanted it, standing in the middle of
the scrimmage. (I was hit twice).

But also optics. Phenomenal.
- -- 

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO

Seek the wisdom of the ages, but look at the world through the eyes of a 

Ron Wild