Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
on 29/9/00 5:59 pm, info@borderless-photos.com at info@borderless-photos.com
wrote:
>> I think the 50 is, pardon me, the spare prick at the wedding here. You end
>> up with a 35 and a 50 or a 90 and a 50 or a 35 and a 90. The only sensible
>> combination here is the last one, so the 50 is surplus to requirements. If
>> you had a 28 and a 90 I might sing a different tune.
>
> Thought you just dumped your 90, or did you have another?
I did try to dump it but the buyer welched, and in between times I found out
what a great lens it is (it's a skinny TE90). It's VERY sharp and
wonderfully round at 2.8.
I know Rabiner hates it, and I admit it has one egregious fault that he
points out, namely that you simply can't shoot into the light with it at any
aperture. That was why I was selling it, because I had ruined a lot of shots
with flare. Now I take a lot more care and don't attempt contre-jour, and
it's a lovely thing.
You can see some examples at:
http://www.zing.com/album/pictures.html?id=4293685451
- --
Johnny Deadman
http://www.pinkheadedbug.com