Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/29

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

Subject: [Leica] Vario-Elmar-R 28-70/3.5-4.5 vs 35-70/4
From: firkin at (Alastair Firkin)
Date: Wed Sep 29 01:46:18 2004
References: <429B89BA414C264A93A2407056F9B932031602@jughead.TheHearth.local> <009001c4a5f1$0d1cd030$ef415142@leirex>

We use the current model 35-70 and cannot complain about the quality of 
the lens or the images it makes: the only beef is the rotation of the 
front element, which means polarizing filters rotate during focusing 
and focusing can be put out by turning the polarizer.

On 29/09/2004, at 4:53 PM, SML wrote:

> Hello,
>   I have been using the 80-200/4 Vario-Elmar with satisfaction 
> specially
> with black & white film for several years despite the fact that it is 
> made
> in Japan.  In my book, it performs as good as a German lens 
> mechanically and
> optically.  Now I am thinking of getting me either one of the zoom 
> lenses in
> the subject line to cover the wide side.  I understand that both are 
> made in
> Japan (by Cosina or Minolta).  I would appreciate any of your 
> experience
> with either lens compared with the 80-200/4.  I know some say the 
> 28-70 is a
> black sheep of the Leica lens family if the 35-70/4 is pretty well 
> comparing
> with the 80-200 which is optically excellent enough to bear the Leica 
> name.
> Is it pretty much in the same league as the old 35-70/3.5 (designed by
> Minolta) which is generally considered mediocre.
> Thanks,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information

In reply to: Message from colucci at (Dan Colucci) ([Leica] Leica R Lenses)
Message from leirex at (SML) ([Leica] Vario-Elmar-R 28-70/3.5-4.5 vs 35-70/4)