RE: [Leica] Nikkor question

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

I'll second the 24 2.8...and for a longish lens, you absolutely cannot beat
the 180 2.8...While there is a later version with a gold band around it that
is called a 180 2.8 ED, it is said that the earlier version includes the
same ED element, and is just as good. It's a terrifically sharp, contrasty,
lens...I'm sure that Eric will tell me that it's a piece of s--- compared to
its Leica counterpart, but....try it...you'll love it.....

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Thomas
> Pastorello
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 1998 4:26 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikkor question
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 26 Nov 1998 pchefurka@plaintree.com wrote:
>
> >
> > > Sorry to bother you but I had a Nikkor question for you.  I recently
> > > inherited an old Nikon F and I am being sent a 105 2.5 lens for it.
> > > I am a Leica user and wanted to know what other old Nikkor lenses
> > > should I hunt for that you feel might be pretty close to the Leica
> > > lenses.  A few people have  said that the 105 is fantastic.  I'm
> > > especially interested in a wide like a 20 or 24 as well as a low
> > > light lens.
> >
> > Take a look at http://www.fcinet.com/ruether/slemn.html - it's a
> > subjective Nikkor evaluation list that I've found I agree with by and
> > large.  FWIW, the manual focus lenses I've really liked include the
> > 28/2.8 AIS (not the AI, though), the 55/2.8 Micro AIS, the 85/2.0 AI,
> > the 105/2.5 and the 180/2.8 AIS (the AF version is better, though).
> >
> > Paul Chefurka
> >
> >
>     I'd add the 24/2.8 AIS.  Also, if you need speed and want beauty in
> your images, and can spend the dollars, I'd replace the 85/2.0 with the
> 85/1.4 AIS.  Good luck.   Tom P.
>
> >
> >
>
>