Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01BDDDAF.0CEFCF60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable LUGERS,=20 Advice needed. I am thinking of replacing my f3.5 35mm Samaron with a modern 35mm. = lens. I don=92t need f1.4, so it boils down to the f2 M or the f2 = aspheric. Same speed. Price difference seems to be about 20%. The = aspheric weighs 95 grams more and is slightly larger.=20 Is the difference in cost, size, and weight justified by improved = pictures? I=92d be grateful if anyone could share their experiences with = these lenses. Thanks,=20 Joe Stephenson=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01BDDDAF.0CEFCF60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 = http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=3DGENERATOR> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV> <P>LUGERS, </P> <P>Advice needed.</P> <P>I am thinking of replacing my f3.5 35mm Samaron with a modern 35mm. = lens. I=20 don’t need f1.4, so it boils down to the f2 M or the f2 aspheric. = Same=20 speed. Price difference seems to be about 20%. The aspheric weighs 95 = grams more=20 and is slightly larger. </P> <P>Is the difference in cost, size, and weight justified by improved = pictures?=20 I’d be grateful if anyone could share their experiences with these = lenses.</P> <P>Thanks, </P> <P>Joe Stephenson </P> <P></P><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2><A=20 href=3D"mailto:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us"> <P> </P></A></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01BDDDAF.0CEFCF60--