Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I like the 80/2.8 Zeiss Planar as a macro lens! Around 1:2 it's got wonderful bokeh. Otherwise, I am mostly shooting landscapes with my Zeiss optics and don't generally get into shallow depth of field. With the possible exception of the 38mm Zeiss Biogon (does it have bokeh? I don't know!), I've always felt that my Zeiss optics erred on the side of smoothness but in a pleasing sort of way. I haven't used any of the 35mm Zeiss glass. In a somewhat unrelated note, I've been thinking of getting a 35mm SLR again and find that the sub-$1300 pricing of the "Code U" R8s makes them a very interesting possibility indeed! This, a short lightweight zoom and a long macro would do nicely. I've been doing some comparison shopping and have noticed that when it comes to primes, Leica overall seems to have the most modern optical designs, but there's a growing bit of competition from...Pentax! The FA-Limited 43mm and 77mm lenses feature good bokeh as a major selling point, but hopes of buying into the system for pocket change were dashed when I tallied up the cost and came out with a $1200+ pricetag for ZX-5n body and both "Limited" optics. Doug Cooper wrote: > I've heard complaints about Planars in normal focal lengths -- and found, > personally, that my 50/1.4 and TLR Planars can be distracting O-O-F -- but > Mike is the only one, to my knowledge, who has come out against *the > entire Zeiss line*. > > In fact, the perceived wisdom seems to be that German optics have nice > blur, as opposed to Japanese optics (a blanket statement that I also > consider absurd); certainly the Japanese feel this, and it's the > foundation for their obsession with *both* Leica and Zeiss. - -- Jeff Segawa Somewhere in Boulder, Colorado