[Leica] 400 help

[Doug Herr <71247.3542@compuserve.com>]

On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Gary D. Whalen, wrote:

>  I am planning on purchasing a 400 2.8 lense for nature/wildlife and
>would GREATLY appreciate any input on Leica vs Canon(autofocus).
>Bottom line - is the Leica 400 2.8 better than the Canon and if so
>please state why.
>
>    I am trully fighting this decision as very soon I am planning on
>purchasing a complete new system.  BUT, this system must have long focal
>lengths and I am trying to decide whether or not the autofocus
>capability of the Canon is worth investing in the entire Canon system.
>Although I believe that the shorter focal length lenses <300 do not
>necessarily need autofocus I believe that once you get into the 400-600
>range autofocus is an advantage.  I want to go full Leica but I am not
>sure of :
>
>        A:  Canon vs Leica lense quality
>        B:  Autofocus vs. Manual focus.
>
>    Thank you in advance.
>
>    David Whalen

David,

Wildlife is my specialty, particularly the more active birds, and having
seen my images used in Audubon and other magazines, several calendars and
field guides as well as a few books here and there, I'm fully qualified to
completely confuse you <g>.

I've tried the "big fast lens on a tripod" approach to wildlife photography
and I hated it.  Not only did I hate carrying the weight and bulk of all
that stuff into the field but I also hated tripping over the tripod and
missing shots when the critters' activity shifted to one side or the other.
 I've been using the 400 and 560 f/6.8 Telyts and with the right viewfinder
there's NO WAY I'd trade these lenses for an AF system.  With a viewfinder
like the SL's focussing is quick, positive and accurate.

With the shoulder stock, the f/6.8 Telyts are HAND-HELD lenses.  No
tripping over tripods, no tripod to get tangled in bushes, incomparable
mobility, and stunning image quality as slow as 1/60 sec (with the 400;
1/125 with the 560).  Photographing birds in flight is not a big problem
with these lenses.

I also use the Telyts on a tripod when nessesary in a blind.  Under these
conditions an APO lens will have an edge in image quality but since my
primary  work is without the blind I'd rather have the hand-held mobility
over the last iota of sharpness.

Keep in mind also that the longest lens isn't nessesarily the best lens
'cuz atmospheric stuff like heat waves, mist and mosquito clouds will
degrade the image as much as kicking the tripod will.

I doubt I'll ever use a 400 f/2.8 unless it's as easy to use as the 400
f/6.8 and can be stuffed into a fanny pack.

Does this help? <VBG>

Doug Herr
Sacramento