Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/13

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

Subject: [Leica] why users love it
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Tue Mar 13 18:19:50 2007
References: <9b678e0703122002g6cee995du75017dd5b7ac7452@mail.gmail.com> <C21B9EB7.48B14%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Mark,
Or a 28-200...I think a Nikon D40x and a 28-200 would be the best carry
around kit going - small, light, 10MP, great range.
Cheers
Jayanand

On 3/13/07, Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/12/07 11:02 PM, "Don Dory" <don.dory@gmail.com> typed:
>
> > Coming in late to this discussion there are several points to make.
> > First, both lenses were stopped down to F11 at which point diffraction
> > should be leveling the playing field so differences are due to the on
> camera
> > imaging chain.
> > Second, in camera sharpening or lack can have an effect.  Both images
> where
> > sharpened alike in LR so there is an optimization opportunity.
> > Third, while trekking in Death Valley last week my bag with a body and
> six
> > lenses was considerably smaller, lighter, faster optics, and less
> unwieldy
> > than my companions carrying a simple two lens SLR outfit 17-40/70-200 or
> > equivalent.  Plus, IR was but a filter away.
> > Fourth, rangefinders float my boat and make me happy.
> >
> >
>
>
> I'm with you but there are DSLRs and there are DSLRs.
> These two lens you mention could be monsters 17-40/70-200
> Like many feel they have to have to do serious photography.
> 2.8's Yuban coffee cans.
> Or they can be very compact lightweight cheap with maybe not such a great
> build but featherweight and with very good imaging quality.
> Those are the lenses I prefer when I do DSLR work. Often consumer "kit"
> lenses.
> And those lenses are only slightly bigger than Leica m glass and I think
> not
> as heavy. The BUILD you just don't want to talk about.
>
> But its apple and oranges rangefinder vs. SLR work.
>
> Still mirror bounce aside the right choice of SLR and you have something
> which has some real class. A real contender for elegant usage. And the
> optics wont embarrass you.
> A D40+ looks real good to me right now.
>
> And never in my life have I ever shot with such an image making enabling
> machine as I have with my Nikon D200. The 12-24 lens amazing.
> Kyle will concur.
> Pete will pontificate.
> Marvin will Marvel.
>
>
> I have often a two lens kit.
> An 18-55 whatever it is kit lens. And a
> 55-200. Tiny light cheap.
> And gets into those hard to reach places.
> In effect you've got everything covered from
> 28mm to 300mm for just a few small ounces. And very few bucks.
>
> If I bring my 12-24 along that's still half the size of the 2.8's its a 4.
>
> But my lenses I've mentioned above are a quarter the size of the 2.8 I
> think. And weight.
>
> There are not ultrawide zoom compacts out that I know of.
>
>
> Mark Rabiner
> 8A/109s
> New York, NY
>
> markrabiner.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] why users love it)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] why users love it)