Hi Neil, By distortion I mean barrel distortion and thsat has nothing to do with positioning. You might have an outstanding sample of the 28-70 but my experience is in accordance with the measurements of Erwin Puts in his Leica lens compendium. I'm glad yours is okay mine was quit disappointing. Best regards and happy new year. Michiel Fokkema ------------------------- Fokkema Fotografie www.michielfokkema.com michiel.fokkema@xxxxxxxxx +31(0)615569576 Neil Gould wrote: > Hi all, > >> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:24:39 +0100 >> From: Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Actually I'd stay away from the 28-70. It really is not up > to Leica >> standards. Quite soft and a lot of distortion on the wide > end. >> The 35-70/4 is much better. If you really need 28mm buy a > prime and >> combine it with the 35-70. >> Cheers, >> >> Michiel Fokkema >> > I have heard this kind of comment before, but it isn't > consistent with my experience. I bought the Leica > Vario-Elmar-R 3,5-4,5 28-70 (ROM) as the first lens with my > R5. Soon after, I bought the 100 2.8 APO and 180 2.8 to fill > out the set. I don't find images from the zoom to be "quite > soft", and the bokeh is decent, too. It is not as sharp as > the 100 APO, but then, that is an outstanding lens in the > Leica line. One has to be careful positioning many wide > angle lenses in order not to get some distortion, and the > 28-70 is no different. But, when you need 28mm, 35mm won't > do, and the convenience of "dialing it in" may reasonably > offset carrying another lens. IMO, the best thing about the > 28-70 is that the general impression about it keeps the > prices low! ;-) > > Happy New Year to all! > > Neil > > > > ------ > Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: > http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/ > Archives are at: > //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/ ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/ Archives are at: //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/