Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/16

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

Subject: [Leica] 200mm test
From: richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man)
Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 12:19:47 -0700
References: <AANLkTilbK3EnpzZp0JIe6iqUaRXlVB-0X98U7g5duwLo@mail.gmail.com> <5A7B4795-BC2B-4158-8B44-13A2BD106DD3@mac.com> <AANLkTimawNeouMBK305ijHBOW6f2J1Yn5rEcN3cjdWkN@mail.gmail.com>

On a Leica list, always preface, "for only $xxx instead of 100 * $xxx, this
little gem fares much better than 1/100th of the Leica lens" :-)

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Vince Passaro <passaro.vince at 
gmail.com>wrote:

> Admittedly it was all in comparison but the level of detail at 100 percent
> was to my eye rather intense and more than I expected. Those ducks and the
> people are a good 300 meters from my window and 100 meters further on in
> the
> picture (on the full size version) it's still that clear. Now as Doug
> pointed out this appears as nothing relative to a Leica R Telyt 180 (or his
> beloved 250) but for a small light* $45 lens it surprised me. And I
> wouldn't
> have commented to the group about this relatively minor matter except that
> there was a longish thread about this lens 4-6 weeks ago. That it's a Nikon
> led me first to pray to the Dr. Ted-god for forgiveness in bringing it up
> at
> all.
> V
>
>
-- 
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/>
// icc blog: <http://imagecraft.wordpress.com>
// photo blog: <http://www.5pmlight.com>
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous
replies in your msgs. ]


In reply to: Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)