Leica glass is *better* particularly at larger apertures. Is it enough
*better* to be worth the dollars? Probably not. If the goal is larger
enlargements, a MF rig would be a better choice.
At least your instructor knows what a Leica is. My last instructor was a
Nikon buff. He knew about Leica, but thought that the lenses were made by
Zeiss.
Bill Stanke
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wheeler" <wheelej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: [OM] First night in Leic*-land. ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of R. Jackson
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 5:12 PM
> To: OM
> Subject: [OM] First night in Leic*-land. ;-)
>
> SO, I know there are some of you out there who own both, are their
> optics really nicer than Zuiko optics? I've always been really
> impressed with Zuiko primes.
>
> -Rob
>
> At the risk of premature death, Yes!
>
> John (M3, bought new 1960 and who still likes his Elmar 50/f3.5)
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|