[LRflex] Re: Mid range zoom advice
- From: "Dr. Puritz" <drpuritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 23:59:43 -0500
FWIW, I traded in the 35-70/3.5 and the 28-70 towards the new 28-90 Asph. I
found absolutely nothing wrong with either of the lenses I traded in, but
simply wanted to try the newest R zoom lens with the added focal length at
either end. The 28-90 is a great performer. It is nice to have both the 28
and the 90 available-the extended range is something that I find useful. I
keep the 28-90 on the R9 almost continuously...it is razor sharp, but much
heavier and larger then the two zoom lenses mentioned already. Allow me to
add that the 80-200 is great for portraits and when one needs more "zooming
power", and I agree with those who have stated that the 80-200 is-dollar for
dollar-perhaps the best bargain in Leica R lenses. Although I have slowly
added and traded for many R lenses over the years, I think that I could
easily get by with the two zooms alluded to above ( 28-90, 80-200 ), and the
new 50/1.4 which, to my mind, has a look and fidelity that is truly unique.
However, a discussion of "that 50mm lens" is for another time.
Let us know what you chose to do, and of course, the very best of luck.
Elliot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Gea-Banacloche" <banacloj@xxxxxxx>
To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:24 PM
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Mid range zoom advice
> Hello, Aram. I am going to use your question as an excuse to
> introduce myself to the group. Some may remember me from the LUG,
> which I still follow intermittently. I am a Spanish physician who
> lives and works in the US, in Washington DC. I started in photography
> in the late seventies, and I got my first Leica (a model 0, of all
> things!) as a present from my wife for my 40th birthday, in 2002.
> Somehow this event (and discovering eBay) pushed me to get some of
> the cameras I had only dreamed about in the 70s. This included a
> Leicaflex SL, then a SL2 (which was what I was aiming for) a Leica M3
> and some other accidents along the way.
> Although I am happy to use from time to time a Leica rangefinder, the
> truth is I like tele lenses better, and I feel much more comfortable
> with reflex cameras. So it was only a matter of time before I started
> following this forum.
>
> By the way, it is only fair I publicly thank David Young for this
> list and his website, as well as Doug Herr for his website (which I
> have not visited since the password protection) and his constant
> friendly advice in this and other lists.
>
> I must add I am mainly (if only in terms of number of pictures taken)
> a Contax user. It may be helpful to remember this to understand
> possible bias...
>
> Anyway-- as you probably have found out the 28-70 is not a Leica
> design, but a Sigma design. It looks like Leica disowns this lens
> now: it is not included in Erwin Put's review of R lenses
> (downloadable in pdf format from the Leica website) and Adorama was
> offering it not long ago as a closeout sale (for $900) and is not
> offered anymore. I take this to mean it is not being produced
> anymore. With this in mind, and "Leica standards of quality control"
> notwithstanding, I would think the 28-70 is probably just like a
> Tamron... (which may be very good, by the way. I just mean to say
> that I am not sure there is a reason to prefer the Leica 28-70 to a,
> say, Tamron 28-105 aspherical with an R adapter)
>
> If you are looking second-hand, I would also consider the older
> 35-70/3.5. I have found it is really good, except for some flare. The
> 35-70/4 is typically (used) twice as expensive. By accident, I ended
> up having both. I have not conducted any formal testing, but both, on
> prints from negatives, looked to my amateurish eyes on par with
> primes used on the same rolls).
>
> If money is no object, get the 28-90mm 2.8-4.5 ASPH.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Juan
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2006, at 2:44 PM, Aram Langhans wrote:
>
>> I am thinking the unforgivable - actually buying a zoom lens. I
>> thought a
>> mid range one would be the place to start since the majority of my
>> shots are
>> with a 35, 50, or the 100 APO.
>> So, I have heard good things about the 35-70 f-4 zoom. I know
>> there is also
>> a 28-70 f-3.5-4.5 zoom, but I can only remember vague not-so-good
>> references
>> to it. I checked out Doug's site and he has no experience or
>> description of
>> the latter. The extra wide range might be a good thing if I ever
>> decided to I
>> get a digital body with a crop factor.
>>
>> So, can anyone give me feedback on these two lenses?
>>
>> Don't worry. I will not be giving up my primes, especially the
>> 100. I just
>> thougth it might lighten my load a bit and speed some travel/
>> tourist type
>> shots with the zoom.
>>
>> Aram
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on
>> how to
>> get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
>>
>> ------
>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
>> Archives are at:
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
