Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]on 8/11/05 8:11 PM, GREG LORENZO at gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca wrote: > Doug Herr writes: > >> >> so B.D. is willing to claim the 180 ED is at least as good as the 180 APO, >> despite never having used the APO. I haven't given the 180 ED a >> decentworkout or test yet, and I haven't used the 180 f/2.8 APO so >> I'll reserve judgement until I can make an objective comparison. Meanwhile >> for >> $159 I won't complain about the ED lens. >> > > But of course he is. What's the use of having an Ouija Board if you never > actually *use* it! > > Regards, > > Greg > Just for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that B.D. is right and the optical performance of the two lenses in question is identical: every squiggle per mm, bokeh, flare, color rendition, distortion, light fall-off... everything. Let's further assume that the build quality, the reliability in hard field use is also identical. In this case would the only remaining objective critereon be the price? Consider the prudent system that includes a backup camera body. To get as much use out of the 180 ED as I would out of a 180 APO, I'd have to have at least 2 N-brand bodies. This is in addition to the Leica reflex bodies I now carry. The Leica system isn't going away; the f/6.8 Telyts can be adapted to N- or other brands easily but the 280 APO can't. A Leica 180 APO wouldn't need the two additional bodies 'cuz I already have them. I'm not considering the Canon solution, adapting L and N lenses to the C body 'cuz IMHO the exposure compensation and manual-diaphragm work-arounds do not a useful system make (IMHO). Also to get as much use out of the 180 ED as I would the 180 APO, I'd have to duplicate the extension tubes and 1.4x extender I now have for Leica reflexes. BTW my tests have shown that in all but one case the 1.4x APO-Extender-R doesn't significantly degrade the optical performance of the prime lens. The 1.4x APO-Extender-R isn't going away either. Also to make the 180 ED as useful as the 180 APO it needs a rotating tripod collar. It would have been very handy today to have had the 180 on my shoulder stock/monopod rig. The STA-1 and Burzynski collars work on the 180 APO; I'd love to hear of any made for the 180 ED. So to answer B.D.'s burning question, yes it's the red dot that makes me think the APO is more useful to me. The red dot means it fits my camera system w/o additional hardware support (bodies, extension tubes, extenders), so with the APO it's more likely I'll be carrying all the hardware support I need when I use the 180. The red dot also means it works with my shoulder stock/monopd rig, which gives me several stops more useful shutter speed. Now recall what I wrote in a previous post: for what I paid ($159) I've no complaints about the ED. Fantastic bargain. But if I leave it in the truck because I'm not willing to carry all its hardware support along with it in addition to my R system, it's not money well spent. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com