Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/29

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] 35 or 50mm as standard lens - the need for speed ?
From: Ray Moth <>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:01:31 -0800 (PST)

Mike Quinn wrote:
Surely you jest. Reflex viewing is MUCH better with wide aperture
lenses. The viewfinder brightness difference is significant.
You can make a case for f2.8 and above on rangefinders, but reflexes 
cry out for wider apertures! Even my (all time reflex favorite) 105mm
f2.5 Nikkor looks a bit dim...

Ray Moth wrote:
> I can live without a 50! Honest!
> But only because I have an Elmarit-R 60mm macro, which is as good as
> any 50 I've ever seen, despite its max. aperture of f/2.8.
Yes, that's generally been my experience, too ... *except* with the
60mm macro. For some reason, this lens just snaps in and out of focus.
I find it to be a very sharp lens and, with its flat field, I can rely
on focus anywhere in the field of view - doesn't have to be in the

Another exception to the rule, in my experience, was the Olympus Zuiiko
50mm/1.4 single-coated lens. This lens was so bad wide open that I
wondered if I was getting cataracts on my eyes! The Zuiko 50mm/3.5
macro was, in comparison, very easy to focus, although it was even
dimmer than the Elmarit 60mm.

To some extent, the type of focusing screen might make a difference.
The one in my R7 has a circular microprism area but no split image in
the middle. 



"The trouble with resisting temptation is
 you never know when you'll get another chance!"

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.