Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ben Ho wrote: <<<I also noted that Leica has a 80-200/4 which is a lot cheaper and very much lighter. > >I can live without the extra 2.8 stop. Does anyone know how is the optics >of this 80-200/4 comparing to the old 135 and the 180 I have? (Thinking of >selling off my 135 and 180.)>>>>>>> Hello Ben, I have the 70-180 because I do need the extra lens speed. However, having used the f4 80-200 I'd buy it instead of the 70-180 without question. Wide open this is a spectacular lens and very under rated for it's quality. When you use it wide open and do a tight frame on someone and can see the individual eyelashes as sharply as they can be, how much sharper does one need a lens. It has excellent overall sharpness, very easy to handle and as I said, if I didn't need that extra aperture stop I'd have the 80-200. You will not go wrong purchasing this lens. Go for it. Itll easily replace the two lenses you're considering selling and I don't doubt you'll probably have better overall images. Excellent colour renditon/contrast also. ted Ted Grant This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler. http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant