Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2018/01/11

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


I drive a 1989 Toyota Land Cruiser and I buy my clothes second-hand.  I
like Leica lenses and think they are almost worth what I pay for them,
especially used - which is how I got this one.
I do intend to use it.  I've been carrying it around the farm for two days
now and my arms and shoulders are fine.  I also like fast lenses and am
willing to put up with extra weight for extra light.

That's just me.  I am a serious pro.

Tina

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:07 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:

> At first thought a 90-280mm sounds like an insanely hyper extended zoom no
> pro would use but it?s just a 70-300 with the ends snipped with a cigar
> cutter.
> Serious shooters tend to like 80-200?s not 70-300s. But I?m ok with them.
> I use them and am getting another one later this year.
> What I am getting is the just out AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm  f/4.5-5.6E ED VR
> $746.95 as I trashed my earlier G version shooting upwards in the rain last
> year getting some of the best shots in my life.. Just a few foggy elements
> they refuse to clean it. Had I been shooting with a pro grade 80-200 2.8 it
> would have been sealed and I?d still have a lens and silk long underwear.
> The new out Nikon ?E? lens weights a pound and a half to the
> Vario-Elmarit-SL? s 4 pounds. It will not make as sharp an image as the
> $6000 Vario-Elmarit-SL but will have its moments as it?s got stuff like VR
> Rated 4.5 stops improvement so you can shoot a tree in the dark hand held
> with an less than a million iso and it?s got stuff no one has like an E
> Electronic diaphragm and AF-P: ?Stepper autofocus motor? faster and quieter
> lens  both of which which others don?t have yet. For the price of the Leica
> lens I can get eight of these. What I need is wool socks. Thinner ones. I
> can get those too then can stop my lenses form clanging in my bag.
>
> I think where they went wrong with this Leica lens for the SL is making it
> a f2.8-4 which is the beginning of  making of a monster. Anybody walking
> around with a current 80-200 2.8 AF?  You?d have  to have arms like Popeye.
> You can settle for an f 4 or 4.5 when you?re out all day with it Some very
> mouthwatering and tele zooms that no one is embarrassed about using are not
> f2.8?s F 4 is the new f2.8.*   But Leica?s main focus now seems to be all
> about non-affordability.  I you could possibly in a million years afford it
> what good is it? It?s for people who drive Ferraris; Leica has said goodbye
> to serious pros long ago. A serious pro could afford the body but not keep
> up at all with the glass. And it?s all about the glass. And having a second
> body.
>
>
> * I could wait for more money and get the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR
> for twice the cost at $1400.
> Probably better sealed than the AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm  f/4.5-5.6E ED VR
> I feel like I should be able to shoot in the rain. And always have.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
>
> On
>     _______________________________________________
>     Leica Users Group.
>     See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Tina Manley
www.tinamanley.com
tina-manley.artistwebsites.com
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html


Replies: Reply from zoeica at mac.com (chris williams) ([Leica] Leica SL 90-280 Lens)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Leica SL 90-280 Lens)
In reply to: Message from tmanley at gmail.com (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Leica SL 90-280 Lens)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.uk (John McMaster) ([Leica] Leica SL 90-280 Lens)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Leica SL 90-280 Lens)