[Leica] widest lens used?

[s.dimitrov at charter.net (slobodan Dimitrov)]

That's food for thought. An acquaintance, who's a staffer shooting in-house, 
told me that he's worn his out. He said it was his favorite lens.
S.d.

On Apr 1, 2010, at 9:35 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:

>> Jesus, Mark, you find that lens useable?
>> S.d.
>> 
>> On Apr 1, 2010, at 8:06 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>> 
>>> And 149 with the compact 55-200
>> 
>> 
> A 80 to 300 full frame lens for full frame is a bit of a monster to shoot
> with. I have one.
> But The 55-200 f4-5.6 G ED AF-S DX Nikor  is that lens at a forth of the
> size and weight and price even. Its one of the few advantages to a cropped
> format you get to use some real compact gear and even pay less money. You'd
> think you were shooting with a half fame system. Then you find out you are.
> If I had the current VR anti vibration version of that lens I'd be using it
> ten times more. Its only a bit bigger  and heavier.
> I obviously  do find it useable as I just said so.
> And while typing it had the images right in front of me on my screen in
> Bridge.
> The specs of this very inexpensive lenes also speak for themselves.
> They are very competitive from a results angle.
> While heavy fast expensive glass is normally considered professional
> Lightweight compact slower and cheaper glass from Nikon often has as good 
> or
> not better specs. Contrast and resolution.  And on a number of levels I 
> find
> compact glass more useable.  Hence my interest in Leica.
> 
> I hear when you shoot Canon you have to stick with the 2.8's the cheaper
> stuff does not have the specs.
> But shooting a nikon system we do have that option.
> It looks bad. People expect to see a 2.8 Yuban coffee can on your camera.
> But to have what looks like a 50mm normal lens on your camera but be able 
> to
> get 3oomm reach is very thrilling and useful to me for the 55 months I've
> been using this lens which I got for 150 bucks new the week it came out.
> I had the sigma lens before that but it had apparitions on the white
> backdrop. Large eerie ghosts. In the field though you never saw them but
> back then I was half the time in the studio.
> 
> As I go back to the 60's to me a zoom lens is an 80 - 200.
> This 55-200 is that lens only for DX as close as I can get to the classic 
> 80
> - 200 angles I am used to
> And I used it on the white backdrop with studio strobes hand holding it for
> shoots lasting several hours.
> 
> http://www.bythom.com/55200lens.htm
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55200.htm
> Thom is farily high on it Ken I doubt uses it at all but briefly checked it
> out.
> I never had much problem with how slow it focuses.
> Especially shooting trees. Even blowing in the wind.
> 
> [Rabs]
> Mark William Rabiner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information