Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/02/24

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] P&S cameras and Canon L glass compared to Leica
From: "Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@hfx.andara.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 19:24:33 -0400
References: <200202230851.AAA19252@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>

Felix:

If you are going to shoot sports, the only option is the Canon EOS 1v.  I 
shoot both sports and scenics.  I found with practice, I was better at 
Hockey, football (American) and Soccer using an R8 with the Leica 400mm 2.8 
than using the Eos 1n and the Canon 400mm 2.8.   The Canon, just can't 
focus quick enough and can hunt a bit when shooting fuller frame shots of 
the players in action.  In hockey, the Eos 1n couldn't keep up with the 
players coming up the ice.  You really had to keep the focus spot on the 
players jersey and the jerseys do not always have enough contrast for the 
focus sensor.  The Eos 1v is better in this respect, as you can enable four 
or five highly sensitive cross sensors and the chances of getting a part of 
their jersey with a graphic or trim to focus on was much higher.

   I did use an EOS 1V for some college football and it was slightly better 
than the R8 and leica 400mm combo.  I compared the keepers per 36 exposure 
roll and they were pretty similar.  The Leica had more by two or three, but 
the Canon's faster motor would fire off three shots to the two I would take 
with the Leica.

  I shot sports full time for about a year and got very skilled with the 
Leica manual focus.  If I was to do it again and only shoot sports, the EOS 
1V would be my choice.  For the other type of photography I do, the R8 is 
superior.  Since when have you had a tree move in a Scenic?  In nature, you 
want the eye of the subject in focus.  Once again you need to use manual focus.

Remember, in my original post I said the Canon 400mm lens looked sharper, 
but the Leica glass produced more pleasing images.  When you get into the 
high end lenses from Canon, you are splitting hairs when comparing them to 
Leica glass.  Some of the Leica R glass is clearly superior.  I would put 
the 35-70 F4 against any f4 or slower Canon lens.  I would also put my 
Leica 105-280 against any Canon or Nikon 100-300 zoom, particularly in the 
longer end of the zoom.  My Scenic page linked below has a few examples of 
what the 35-70 and 105-280 can do.

http://home.istar.ca/~robsteve/photography/NovaScotia.htm

Regards,

Robert



At 10:45 PM 2/24/2002 +0100, Felix Lopez de Maturana wrote:
>Robert
>
>This must be true as you have used both equipments and therefore I accept
>it, unless up to the moment I can do the test myself. But then what is your
>opinion about the fact that I never see in soccer any Leica lenses but
>Nikon/Canon ones?
>
>Kind regards
>
>Felix

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html