Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bill Satterfield wrote: > > I like the TE becuase of it's size and weight. The 2 is heavy and big. The TE > is a good walking around lens and the 2 is not. The 2 is not being used and I > thought if I got the latest 2.8, I would have two good lens to use.Any reason > to keep the 2? > > Dan Cardish wrote: > > > Why keep the TE if you are getting the newer 2.8. Or vice versa? > > > > Dan C. > > > > At 08:20 AM 12-06-00 -0500, Bill Satterfield wrote: > > >I have the 90/2.8 TE as well as the 90/2 non- asph. I was thinking about > > >selling the 2 and getting the latest 2.8 and keep the TE. Any thoughts on > > what > > >I should do? > > > > > >drodgers@nextlink.com wrote: > > > It's a little hard to come away form Erwins thing on the 90/2 non- Asph impressed. And now the new one for comparison is the 90/2 Asph-apo perhaps the most imprsssive glass in the history of optics. Why would you want this ugly looking older thing? And some crazy French magazine five years ago pretty much called the Current Elmarit one of the greatest optics of all time! When a French maitre d's saw you with this lens they always gave you the best table in the whole joint! I would think the fact that the TE was replaced by a lens twice it's size would make one suspicious. It's obvious Leica felt they had made a mistake and had to have the whole thing rethunk. Normally a new version of a lens is more compact and lighter by a small margin. All of a sudden they come out with one twice the size and weight. I certainly experienced first hand the reason! Would not wish one on my worst enmity! Mark Rabiner