Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I just looked ... I was afraid I went too far. But no, it's a good performer. Funny, when I've used it on the D100 (the digital) it looks terrible. Mind you ... the 50/2.8 Elmar from the 50'ies is no killer lens. That is what I was comparing it with. It's visibly better than the Elmar even when the zoom is used wide-open. If you're really interested I have a couple of shots from last week. I'll post them later. Daniel On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, Feli wrote: > I doubt that Daniel. Even Nikon shooters can see the difference between > one of their primes and that zoom. > > feli > > On Jan 21, 2005, at 9:21 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote: > > > Chris, > > > > The crappiest lens I have (seen in PS) is the 50/2.8 Elmar. The > > consumer > > zoom I have (24-85 Nikkor) blows it away. > > > > Once they're out on a print ... you can't tell the difference. > > > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________________ > feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 > www.elanphotos.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >