Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Steve, > >>>Good! I know that I have no trouble adapting to new stuff, but, with the > 50/1.4, I agree with that 'leave well enough alone thinking.' Why spend an > R&D fortune for a tiny increase in performance. The other thing to think > about is the 50/1.4 and 50/1.0 are really very low volume lenses, so would > there really be a big enough market for a new marginally improved lens.<< > > I wonder how sales of the 50/1.4 M stack up? I have a > late-but-non-built-in-hood 50, and I find that I use it more than my 35/1.4 > ASPH. If I had to choose between the two, I'd take the 50. The 35 probably > performs better wide open. But I just like the angle of view of the 50 more. > Conversely, on my R7 I use my 35/2 way more than my 50/2. Again, it's a > focal length issue. > > Dave > .....interesting, sounds like we both have a preference for the 50. I also have the 35/1.4 pre-asph and the new Summicron 28/2.0 which is better wide open than the two 'luxes.. At 1.4 I think the 50 has an edge on the 35. But it is almost a moot point as my wide open shooting is maybe 30%. Anyway, the 50/1.4 is my all time favourite lens with the 35/1.4 second. sl