[LRflex] Re: The "not a REAL Leica lens" 70-210 zoom//Micro 4/3rds
- From: "Mike B." <funsky1@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:45:36 -0800 (PST)
Eventually I want an Olympus EP-2 or one of the Lumix Micro 4/3rds cameras.
If I buy - I will buy both the Nikon and Leica R adaptors by Novoflex - they
will cost as much as the camera!
I see on CameraQuest some cheaper import adaptors but the Novoflex versions
look like they are stronger = I would worry about putting too much weight on
either cameras' lens mount...
--- On Fri, 2/12/10, Walter Kramer <walter.kramer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Walter Kramer <walter.kramer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [LRflex] Re: The "not a REAL Leica lens" 70-210 zoom
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, February 12, 2010, 5:57 AM
Doug,
Yes, my understanding is that the 80-200 is a Leica design made by
Kyocera for Leica. The 70-210 Leica lens is a Minolta design but
specked up and made by Minolta in Japan for Leica. Personally I get a
lot of satisfaction and good results from using older lenses and the
price is right. I would encourage people to explore this option now
that one can mount legacy glass on micro four thirds cameras. I have a
50mm Summicron DR which I sometimes mount on my Pana G1 and the special
character of that lens is not lost.
Cheers
Douglas Sharp wrote:
> Walter,
> And I seem to have read somewhere that the 80-200 is a Kyocera.
>
> I certainly agree on your last point - it's the "character" of a lens
> that is important, not its clinical, technical perfection.
>
> I have a couple of "cheap & nasties" that produce a wonderful atmosphere
> in certain shots. E.g. a Steinheil Cassarit 2.8/45 for a Braun Paxette
> (Braun screw mount) that makes gorgeous misty pictures like an immensely
> expensive Softar when used on bellows.
>
> Cheers
> Douglas
>
> On 12.02.2010 11:12, Walter Kramer wrote:
>
>> Hate to add to confusion but I am led to conclude from online research
>> that the Leica 70-210 f4.0 is a Minolta design specked up to Leica
>> requirements and sold as a Leica lens.
>>
>> I sold one of these for the 80-200 f4.0 however my conclusion after
>> using both is that the 70-210 is a very fine lens in it's own right and
>> has a character different to the 80-200 especially with regard to tone
>> and bokeh ... yet not as sharp.
>>
>> Sharpness and resolution aren't the be all and end all, so much so in
>> this case that I am considering re-acquiring the 70-210 for its special
>> qualities - never sell a Leica or Leica *simulacrum*?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
>
--
Walter Krämer
walter.kramer@xxxxxxxxxxxx
walter.kramer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bus: 03 9854 2463
Mob: 0414 884 965
------
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/
Other related posts:
