Re: [Leica] Re: LC5 Wide attachmentI

["Michael Volow" <mvolo@acpub.duke.edu>]

Based on Neal's thoughtful comments, I've decided to keep the WA conversion
lens. I suppose the optical performance justifies the size.

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Neal Friedenthal" <neal@nairobisafari.com>
To: "leica users group" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 5:38 PM
Subject: [Leica] Re: LC5 Wide attachmentI


> 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
>

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