Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 03-06-2000 14:53 george wrote: > can anyone advise concerning whether some of the less >expensive used R zooms on the market have any pitfalls... George, For a long time I didn't want to touch a zoom lens. I'd had bad experiences in the past. But I was won over by the 80-200/4. My personal feeling is that it is as good as any prime lens I've used in that range (Nikon, Contax or Leica). The only tradeoff I see is the loss of speed -- one to three stops vs an 85/1.4 or 180/2.8. Shutter speed is not the issue. I can always use artificial light. (Flash is one driver behind my using an SLR). However, focusing becomes a bit more difficult in marginal light. That, to me, is a real practical issue. I kept my 90/2 R after I purchased the 80-200/4 for that reason. In terms of performance, I don't see a practical difference between prime or zoom. I've seen enough slides that I'm convinced the 35-70/4 would perform as well as my 35/2 R. I say that again in a practical sense, since I'm sure the 35/2 would edge out the zoom in a lens test at f4. I just haven't purchased a 35-70 yet, but I think it's only a matter of time. Dave.