[LRflex] "New" R Elmarit28-90 Asph redux
- From: "Robert O. SHAW" <rj5s@xxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:49:33 -0700
When I bough my R9 earlier this year, I was coming across from 10 years of
Contax (RTS and RX) SLR bodies and Zeisslenses. This included the
spectacular 21mm 2.8, 50 1.4, 135 2.8. (a bargain at full price), 100 2.0
(my favorite for portraits, and color jobs), 300 f 4 (only wish it had a
tripod mount, but superb).
So I looked at the insurance settlement, researched Irwin Puts and every
other english language site I could find, talked to pros and amateur owners
and decided that, for the money, the R Elmarit 28-90 was the best investment
with the best available performance.
Turns out I couldn't be happier with this lens. Plus it takes the place
(quite well, thank you) of 28/35/50/75 and 90 primes which would have
prevented me from filling out the kit with the R* and the 70-180 if
purchased separately.
I've done black and white color portraits at 75 to 90mm with this lens and
would be hard put to say I am not really satisfied. Test rolls included
color and B&W print film up to asa 400 and Kodak E100 (my personal favorite)
chromes and I'm felling better with each successive roll about this lens.
Looking ahead, I'm considering the R 19mm and perhaps and the 2x APO
Extender. As to the 19mm, I was able to shoot some frames on the R9 and it
reminded me a lot of the Ziess Distagon 21mm 2,8, a lens I'd very highly
recommend in either the SLR or G2 format Contax bodies.
For now, I find that at 28mm the 28-90 enlarges nicely. Much better than
"just getting by" until I can afford the R 19mm.
As to the 70-180 I'm finishing a test roll of plain old Kodak 100 Gold. My
favorite for studio work when using strobe. No kidding. Colors tend to
come out quite natural as seen through the viewfinder.
So when I get my 70-180 APO prints back, I'll report. I am anticipating
more than a few frames displaying camera movement (me as the mover), but
it's a test roll to see what my limits are when hand hold 4 pounds of Leica
stuff. Besides, we all know what the lens can do.
Regards to all,
Bob
>From: "Dr. Elliot Puritz" <drpuritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [LRflex] Re: Was "promotions", now Vario Elmars.
>Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:26:48 -0400
>
>Hi again David: I note that the current list price for the R70-180/2.8- is
>well over $6,000. I suppose that means that Bob will have to allow us to
>live vicariously through his reports! I agree that it will be interesting
>to hear how the new lens performs in everyday work. Bob, the very best of
>luck with your new lens. Use it in good health.
>
>Speaking of "everyday work", it is likely that many of us have what we
>need
>to "get the job done" with the equipment we have. The situation with
>regards to advertising to hobbyists ( as opposed to "pros" who may well
>need the very best lens for the once in a life time opportunity ) involved
>with photography, golf, boating, etc. is that the new and more expensive
>"thing" will allow one to be "better". Thus, that new set of golf clubs
>with the special forged titanium face will allow one to hit a drive 10
>degrees further, etc. We all know that the hype rarely is reality. For
>instance, the new Asph 28-90 lens has not made me able to take appreciably
>"better" pictures of the children, grandchildren, and scenery here in
>Florida then the "older" 28-70 lens, or even the 35-70 that David alluded
>to. Indeed ( and I am sorry to be appearing to take the liberty to speak
>for Doug ), would it be even remotely possible that the newer Leica
>telephoto system would produce images that would surpass the fabulous
>images of wild life that Doug produces with his older Telyt lenses?
>
>Simply some musing as I look about some of the myriad of sites extolling
>the
>virtues of various cameras and lenses.
>
>Elliot
>
>
>From: "David Young" <telyt@xxxxxxxxx>
>To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 11:05 AM
>Subject: [LRflex] Re: Was "promotions", now Vario Elmars.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On 21/08/2005 at 10:35 AM Dr. Elliot Puritz wrote:
> >
> >>Hi David: Well...hard to really know which lens is "best". Obviously
> >>there
> >>are the MTF graphs, and then there is real life experience. I agree
>with
> >>you about the 80-200. For the price the lens is a real bargain. I must
> >>add
> >>that the new 28-90 Asph is also wonderful. I find the lens to have a
> >>very=
> >
> >>interesting and unique reproduction of color tones-almost pastel like.
> >>Again, one is probably splitting the proverbial hairs. Indeed, I recall
> >>many saying that the older R 28-70 was not a good lens. However, I have
> >>many fine photographs that would belie that assessment.
> >>
> >
> > I couldn't agree more, Elliot! I used to own the Minolta designed/made=
> > 35~70 Vario Elmar, and it had a very "so-so" reputation. Yet my albums
> > and=
> > slide trays are filled with excellent images from that lens. The chap
>I=
> > sold it to, is still very happy with it.
> >
> > Bob's newly acquired 70~180 f2.8 Vario is widely (even outside the
>Leica=
> > community) considered the best zoom lens for 35mm ever built... equal
>in=
> > performance to the very best primes. The 80~200 f4 Vario is probably=
> > second in line, and while it noticeably outperforms my old 180/f4
>Elmar,=
> > that was not from the most recent series of lenses. I supect the newer=
> > 180's will outperform the f4, if only by small amounts.
> >
> > OTOH, I used to own the 75~150 Zuiko Zoom for the OM-1 and it was quite=
> > good (especially for it's day!), though after switching to the OM-1 from
> > a=
> > Leica CL, the lens seemed just adequate.
> >
> > Currently, I own the 17~85mm Canon Zoom, bought to go with the 20d=
> > LeiCanon. It's sharp enough, but lacks contrast. Distortion at the
>wide=
> > and full tele ends of the range is distinctly noticeable and it has a=
> > terrible tendency to flare - even with the lens hood in place! Without
> > the=
> > hood, it is a disaster! For CAD$700 I'm not very impressed. Still, it=
> > fills a gap for the LeiCanon that I cannot afford to fill with Leica=
> > glass... at least, not at this point.
> >
> > As zooms improve, they become a great boon to the traveler.
>F'rinstance,
> > I=
> > can carry the afformentioned Canon zoom, the 80~200/f4 Vario and a 2x=
> > converter, and I've got 17 to 400mm coverage in a minimal kit! If I
>allow=
> > for the 'crop factor' of 1.6, I get the equivalent of 28mm through
>640mm!=
> > Not bad for just 2 lenses and a converter! (At this point, it's the
> > only=
> > reason I keep the Canon zoom!)
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > David Young,
> > Logan Lake, BC
> > CANADA.
> >
> > Personal Web-site at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
> > Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> >
> > ------
> > 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:
- » [LRflex] "New" R Elmarit28-90 Asph redux
