Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 5:08 PM -0500 1/11/02, Dante Stella wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Lucien wrote:
>
>> > The URL is
>> > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=514596
>>
>> According to Chasseur d'Images' test, is not such a good lens.
>>
>
>I wouldn't be so dismissive unless CDI did the same test with a
>conventional lens and did better. Looks pretty damn good to me. A good
>shot that you get is better than an excellent shot you miss.
>
>Dante
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
According to Canon's MTF chart the 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 are both
considerably better. Admittedly, that's a very high standard, but you
pay a price both in money and performance for the reduced weight.
- --
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html