Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/20

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica: 90 /2.8 M Tele-Elmarit
From: Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 01:30:08 -0800

Neil Miller wrote:
> 
> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 18:25:50 -0500
> From: kabob@tiac.net (Bob Keene/Karen Shehade)
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Tele-Elmarit 90M(was:Elmar C 90mm)
> 
> I recently purchased a 90 /2.8 M Tele-Elmarit; so this thread is abit
> frightening to me- I haven't had a chance to run extensive tests yet
> with
> the Tele; I  just did some headshots last night; but has anyone else
> developed an opinion like Mark's on this lens? Chris's comments are
> encouraging, but I'll be using the lens handheld with fast film;
> probably
> 3200.... last night I was using strobes and XP2 Super rated at 320  f8
> 1/2
> @ 1/45th. We'll see what we see, but I'll welcome any comments. I don't
> want to think I've bought a 'dog'.....
> 
> Bob Keene
> "nobody's Pal, Everyone's something...."
> (I'm Co-Dependant No More!- unless that upsets you....)
> 
> Bob,

Why not shoot some 100 or slower with that same flash? Shoot a short
roll of slow slide film both with that flash or better on a tripod so
you can check all your F stops. Shoot your typically subject matter. 
You time of fright should quickly end when you get these tests back. The
3200 is just prolonging the agony as its new low res stuff of untested
history.  My lens could have been a fluke and Erwins opinions might not
be right or my interpretation of it might not be right. Definitely read
his comparison of the 90's and decide what he is saying and how much it
rings true for yourself. You have to read him more than once and read
between the lines a tiny bit. He conveys a high bit of tech info that
one would typically not be inclined to absorb.
Mark Rabiner