[LRflex] Re: Lens Advice

Hmm. Most of what I read says the Pre-IF was not as sharp as the IF version. Who knows.... Maybe a issue with samples. Of course, our Leica stuff is very consistent sample to sample. 

Any idea about the Olympus equivalent lens?

Aram

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Doug Herr" <wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:09 PM
To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <lug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Lens Advice


Aram Langhans wrote:
So, maybe I should look at the pre-IF version? Or are there trade-off's for 
this lens, too?
The pre-IF version is an exceptionally sharp lens with excellent color quality. Its drawbacks are much slower and stiffer focussing, a longer minimum focus distance, a tendency toward harsh bokeh, and pricing based on its scarcity. It's the second-sharpest 300mm-ish lens I've had the pleasure to use, even after the TSA did it's thing to the front element, but the handling has me wishing it had IF along with its exceptional image quality. The ED-IF is an excellent lens and most people would be delighted with its performance. My problem is that I've been spoiled by the 280mm f/4 APO and the pre-IF 300mm f/4.5 ED. 

Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com


------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
  http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
   http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/


------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
  http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
   http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: