telyt wrote:
In my experience the f/5.6 is a weaker performer. Aside from detail, it has lower contrast & flares more readily. The f/6.8 isn't without optical quirks but in the central region (at least the area covered by the DMR) it's quite sharp with good color saturation and very little flare. It has some field curvature and color fringes in higher-contrast OOF areas; I've learned to work around these problems.
Thanks for the info, telyt. I thought this 560/5.6 would be a great telephoto on my APSC camera, but it just wasn't quite up to my expectation. Should have bought the f/6.8 version instead.
Worldinlens wrote:
From somewhere in the serial numbers 36xxxxx R50/2 were produced in Germany. However, any difference in the coating I have not noticed.
my shop has a cron 50 but wants 1400 for it b/c its new
aCIDfire -- There are two versions, and this is the second version, which reported to be the better of the two. The first version has a wider front focusing ring. You can see examples of the two types on ebay. Prices are very reasonable, and I'm quite impressed with the sharpness and color -- compares well to the Leica 60 macro, if that means anything to you.
Those yellow rocks are wide open around 28mm, the yellow bush is at f/8 at 40mm. The other shots were mostly f/5.6 to 8.0 settings, IIRC.
The prices for exellent Leica-R lenses continuously increased from year to year. However, as in all good manual lenses from other brands, which is no longer available.
Price of the new lens was $2995 in 2008. And this price is in general not reduced. Just R35 You can buy much cheaper now in excellent condition on eBay or or somewhere else
BTW -- I'm really impressed how little (almost zero) CA this lens has, and not even a lot of distortion. The biggest difference between OOC and using the Canon 28-70L profile in LR4 is the removal of some vignetting and a bit of distortion -- but it's not outrageous.
Gunzorro wrote:
aCIDfire -- There are two versions, and this is the second version, which reported to be the better of the two. The first version has a wider front focusing ring. You can see examples of the two types on ebay. Prices are very reasonable, and I'm quite impressed with the sharpness and color -- compares well to the Leica 60 macro, if that means anything to you.
Those yellow rocks are wide open around 28mm, the yellow bush is at f/8 at 40mm. The other shots were mostly f/5.6 to 8.0 settings, IIRC.
I got both versions. The 1st version (V1) is an excellent choice for cropped body, very good resolution at the center. In fact, if you look at the MTF (Leica Lens Compendium 2011), the V1 has higher resolution at the center, but weaker at the edge. In addition, the V1 is based on a 9 elements design. That's unusual for Leica, so I guess they did put a lot of effort on this one in 60's. On the other hand, the V2 has only 6 elements.
phuang3 -- Only six elements?! I've never heard of a zoom having so few elements. Even the 35-70 f/4 has eight elements. Very interesting. I'll need some corroborating data on that.
Here's one of the articles I read while waiting for my lens to arrive. Mine is the later version, unveiled in 1997- made by Kyocera. I can't fault the optics, and the mechanics are impressive.
