Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 12:13:27 -0400 From: "Michael Volow" <mvolo@acpub.duke.edu> Subject: Re: [Leica] LC5 wide Attachment Message-ID: <001101c3755a$f8aa90a0$0200a8c0@vol3> References: I too purchased the wide angle attachment for my Digilux 1 ( the one intended the Panasonic LC5 -- the Leica version, if it exists was unavailable). I haven't tried it on the camera yet because the attachment that holds it to the camera is still on back order. However, I was unpleasantly surprised how huge it is. Bigger around (about 80mm) than most Leica M lenses! And heavy! Bigger and heavier than my 21/2.8 Aspheric. The size almost defeats the purpose of having a great (equivalentt) 33-100mm/f2-2.5 walkaround camera. How does its physical size compare to WA attachments for other comparable digicams? Plus the 0.8 smallification should change the equivalent 33mm wide end only amodewst amount, to a 26mm WA (if my math is correct). This at a time when the newest high end noninterchangeable digicams are featuring 28mm wide ends (Minolta, soon to be released Sony, ? others). I have been thinking of sending it back. However, the pictures Neal posted using this attachment are quite sharp. Am I being too hasty? Michael, I too was a bit surprised by the size of the attachment when I got it, but pleasanty so. I've usedauxiliaryy lens attachments in the past and have found that all too often they are too small to be optically sound. Wide angle attachments especially have a tendency to vignette, this is even true with the Rollei Mutars, which were and are considerably more expensive than the Panasonic version. The size of the rear element of the LC5 wide attachment which is considerably larger than the front element of the cameras lens, as well as the overall size of theopticall system of the lens minimizes this vignetting. While I too would like a bit more of a wide angle than the equiv. of a 26MM, it is still more useful for wide shots than a 33mm, and as I said with my posting the results are very acceptable. Neal F - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html