Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/02

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

Subject: Re: 180 crap?? (was:Re: [Leica] Re: Best Hadow and Highlight Metering)
From: "Julian Thomas" <>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 18:53:59 +0100
References: <>

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Herr" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 6:11 PM
Subject: 180 crap?? (was:Re: [Leica] Re: Best Hadow and Highlight Metering)

> I'm curious which 180 qualifies as crap ...  I understand the expensive

Sorry Doug, a bit of a too-quick email. I was doing a lot of theatre stuff
and wanted a 2.8 180 on a mechanical body with a good spot meter. I've
always used OMs but loved the R6. At the time the leica 2.8 very stiff and
awkward to use. I tried both and the Olympus was sharper and easier to focus
and handhold at low light levels. I couldn't justify the price of a leica,
especially considering I was shooting without flash, usually at 30/60th sec
wide open on tmax 3200. Neither gave me the same quality as the Nikon 2.8,
but the Nikon bodies were just too noisy. This all about 10 years ago before
the leica asph 180.


In reply to: Message from Doug Herr <> (180 crap?? (was:Re: [Leica] Re: Best Hadow and Highlight Metering))