RE: [Leica] 90 f/2 or 75 f/1.4

["..RODGERS, RICK" <rick@quicktest.com>]

No flamewar necessary. I was actually very surprised at the results, having
gone into the weekend with the assumption that i would see very minimal
improvements if any. I shot about 2 rolls of portra 160vc neg on each body.
Used TTL metering for m6 ttl and matrix for the f100. The sharpness of small
elements far away when focused at infinity was pronounced, as was the affect
of the light coming through my niece's hair (not sure of the technical term
:). The leica was sharper and more lifelike. If you any suggestions on what
I missed I would be glad to hear them. In my experience not only did I pick
the leica shot nearly every time, but so did a number of my
friends/relatives. Both under blind conditions. I don't profess to know much
if anything about the proper testing procedures or photography in general
for that matter. But to my eyes the leica won hands down. Maybe i wasn't
using the nikon properly but I've used it for a little while and thought I
had the basics down. Thanks for your thoughts on the matter.

rick

- -----Original Message-----
From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 3:43 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] 90 f/2 or 75 f/1.4


Well, not to start a flamewar, but I defy anyone to successfully pick either
a shot taken with the Summilux 75, a magnificent lens, or the Nikon 85 1.4
AF D, an equally magnificent lens, out of a pile of photos taken with those
two lenses.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of ..RODGERS,
> RICK
> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 3:02 PM
> To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
> Subject: [Leica] 90 f/2 or 75 f/1.4
>
>
> Hello,  I am trying to decide on which lens to buy fo my first leica. I
> used a friends m6ttl and 75 1.4 for a week comparing it to my f100 and 85
> 1.4 and just finished putting the nikon up on ebay. I could not
> get over the
> difference in quality. I do mostly amateur travel photography and
> have been
> shooting for little over a year. My first roll on the leica was
> better than
> my 200th+ roll on the nikon. To the point, I was reading old messages on
> this list and some various reviews on the web and seemed to be getting
> differing opinions on the quality of the 90 2.0 relative to the 75 1.4. I
> realize that the 90 apo version is the newer and presumably
> better model of
> the 90 f/2s available. I would rather sacrifice the extra stop in favor of
> the extra focal length but I don't want to sacrifice the quality
> I saw from
> the 75 1.4. Am I over thinking this? Any opinions appreciated.
>
> Rick
>