Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2018/07/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yes , more testing of legacy lenses against the current whiz bang wunderkinds .. I am trying to get a great optically, light weight kit of lenses for my A7ii, without spending a fortune. The lenses are Leica 70-210 F4 Vario Elmar Introduced in 1984 . ! Nikon AF-D 75-240 F4.5-5.6 Introduced in 1999. Only 1 year of production. Nikon AF 70-210 F4 1986-1987 production Nikon AF-G 70-200 F4 Current lens Komura 85-205 F3.8 Not worth looking up .. Pre AIS. ( Sony lenses, 70-210 F4, are $1K used. The most expensive lens in the test set was $600. If I were to spend $1k on a lens in this range, it would be the Leica 80-200 F4. Supposed to be great!) Tests were done by photographing my notorious 45 year old natural grey cedar fence in the front yard, about 25 feet distance, in bright sun. Test settings were 70mm ( or shortest), 135mm, 200mm and Longest focal length, if over 200mm. Test shots were taken at Wide open ( F4 or about F4), F8, and F16. All combinations of focal length and f stop. Focusing was done by the modern equivalent of ground glass, at selected FL and aperture. Some lenses had a noticeable amount of focus shift from change of aperture. With an EVF, this is a pretty trivial concern. The same adapter was used on all, the Fotodiox Pro Smart AF adapter ( the one purported to blow up your A7 camera, which has never happened except once . To someone else. It should be noted that ALL the Nikon lenses had full camera operable apertures through this adapter. However, AF does not work on any AF lens with Nikon body AF screw, and the G lens did not work in AF with this adapter.) The adapter is going off on Monday to be replaced by a new Fotodiox AF adapter that has a better track record for not blowing up cameras. Lenses were checked for IQ in the center of the frame . No IBIS, the camera was tripod mounted. Let?s get the worst one out of the way The Komura was just not in the same class as the others. Even for the $9.00 I paid for it, it was terrible. Now the surprise winner . The Leica 70-210 just was great . Better than anything else by a pretty good margin. #2 was the Nikon 75-240, considered to be a lowly consumer lens ( lower quality than the Pro lenses..????).. and the lightest lens by ? . #3 was the Nikon AF-G Wunderkind be all and end all . It did not hold up at any aperture of focal length to the Leica . At the longer FL, beat out the 75-240 by a bit . But its cost is greater by factor of 5, so it loses out on at least price / performance ratio .. The Nikon AF 80-200 F4, while considered a cult lens of superior quality, just did not cut it.. the faster lens performed quite a bit worse than its newer, lighter, and cheaper sibling . Ergonomically, all the Nikon lenses worked great with the adapter, for iris control. The Leica requires full manual operation . I do not need AF. I am lazy and like to have it, but do not need it. The non-G Nikon lenses require manual focusing no big deal for accuracy, BUT the focus ring in on the outermost part of the lens and is hard to grab to focus. The G lens has a nice big wide focus ring. The best Nikon lens weighed in at 410g The Leica weighs 720g The Nikon G lens weighs 850g Plus the appropriate adpter. One last comment.. the Leica lens showed a bit of a color shift towards the blue. Certainly correctable, if it bothers. So there it is . The Leica lens was the best optically ( but you knew that) .. Which will I bring to my next big trip?????? It gets down to more automatic features or better IQ. Frank Filippone Red735i at verizon.net