[Leica] was Leica DSLR, now L or R glass?

["Red Dawn" <reddawn@singnet.com.sg>]

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Jensen" <randy@jamzcheer.com>
Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Leica DSLR


> Actually, I think this only applies to the 28-70 Vario-Elmar.  Some of the
> early designs were partnerships with Minolta of some kind also.
>
> Because of this the 28-70 is not received very well.  However, I own one
> (got an amazing deal on it) and I use it a lot.  Because of its
convenience
> I will often get a shot with it that I blow up to 16x20 or so and the lens
> looks GREAT.  Even though it's a Sigma design, it's under Leica's quality
> control, so maybe the design is great, but Sigma's quality control sucks.
>
> I know the 16 fisheye is a Minolta design, yet it rates as one of the best
> in lens tests for 35mm fisheye lenses, far above the Minolta brand one.

Hi

all of which leads to something i've been wanting to find out for myself -
are the R lenses just as good as the best (L glass / AFS glass) from their
Japanese Canon / Nikon counterparts, or up to the high standards of M glass?

anybody has an idea of how the 35mm R Summilux stacks up against a Canon
35mm f1.4L? or the 24mm Elmarit R against the el cheapo Canon 24mm f2.8, or
even the Canon 24mm f1.4L?

the reason i'm interested is because i'm been thinking about getting a DSLR
in the form of the new 10D, (or maybe a second hand 1D), and throwing Leica
R glass in front for the best of both worlds. But if R glass has Japanese
origins or are of varying quality, then i figured i might be better off
spending the money on the premium Canon lenses instead.....

for those using Canon digital bodies with R glass, do u just use R glass
exclusively, or do you mix and match lenses from both systems for the same
digital SLR? if so, why?

thanks....

boon hwee



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