Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>snip As Nikon didn't have anything that >> could touch the 100 APO (and still don't) I snip >> Bill Rosauer >So you are saying the famous and awesome 105 2.8 macro is compleatly >outclassed by Leica? >I thought this was one case where Nikon was not far behind. I thought >there were even obscure aspects of the Nikon glass that was superior. A >vested interest is apparent here. I have the non AF version. >Mark Rabiner > Mark, The famous and awesome 105 2.8 Macro is outclassed by the Leica. Not by much though. At around 5.6 the Nikon gets really really good. The Leica is really good from 2.8 and GREAT when stopped down a bit. I've extensively tested the Nikon AF version 2.8 macro, the manual 105 2.5 and 1.8 lenses (and lots of others) with my digital scanning camera and with film. I could only test the Leica with film since it won't fit on the scanner. I've yet to find a Nikon lens thats real good until its stopped down quite a bit. If you mostly use the Nikon lens stopped down you'll be happy. Its the wide open aperture performance that Nikon stumbles with. I use the Nikon 105 2.8 AFD (and the 60 2.8 macro) everyday. I nearly always use them at f 8 or 11 and they perform very well. As for other Nikon lenses, well I've sold lots of mine and I'm replacing that part of my toolbox with Leica. Leica makes lens that perform right from the get-go. No surprise to the members of this list! The amazing thing to me is that Nikon does not make a lense that can compete with Leica glass. I guess they wrote off that part of the market. Henry