Paul Yi wrote:
I sold it to finance my current converted Contax N lenses....
Plus, I felt that y eyes weren't getting any better for manual focusing...
Apo 180/2.8, however, is pretty easy to manual focus than some other MF lenses...
It's pretty light too...
I do want to try the lens again for sure....
Paul, what did you like about the 180mm F2.8 R APO? I checked the Ebay prices and now suffer from a severe case of sticker shock. $2k for a 200mm F2.8 lens What merits the $2k price? I expected to see some bargain prices since the R line is discontinued, but clearly, that is not the case.
shaunmlavery wrote:
Al Shooter, does the af extentsion ring simply reduce the minimum focus distance? I ask because I think I may pick up a 90mm soon.
I can't decided between it or a 100mm makro planar. Hmm...
I have the Leica extension tube which I some times use on a range of lenses, including the R 180 cron which allows for some nice close focus work. Any extension tube eliminates the possiblity of infinity focus and their use can be limited, especially with a 25mm tube. Canon has a 12mm tube which would be handy.
The shots below are with the R 80 with the Leica extension tube (I think it's 25mm).
JohnJ wrote:
... the Leica extension tube (I think it's 25mm).
Leica has made a few different extension tubes over the years. Any of the ones with auto-diaphragm coupling are 30mm long, and the manual ones that unscrew and allow additional tubes to be added between the flanges are 25mm each.
John Black wrote:
Paul, what did you like about the 180mm F2.8 R APO?
I'm not Paul but I've been using the 180mm f/2.8 APO for about a year now. It's lightweight, has a tiny bit of vignetting at full aperture, otherwise no bad habits. Good bokeh, excellent minimum focus distance, sharp sharp sharp at full aperture. The aperture blades are a bit short so at the wider apertures OOF highlights have a ninja-star look to them. I wish the focus ring had a little more resistance (and can't be adjusted), and I wish it had a built-in rotating tripod collar like the 280mm f/4 APO has. IMHO, a bit more resistance in the focusing ring and the built-in tripod collar would make the lens just about perfect. I can't help with pricing questions. If you want to see crazy try to find a Leica 280mm f/4 APO for the $1600 I paid for mine 5 years ago.
shaunmlavery wrote:
Al Shooter, does the af extentsion ring simply reduce the minimum focus distance? I ask because I think I may pick up a 90mm soon.
I can't decided between it or a 100mm makro planar. Hmm...
Yes, exactly. This is what it does. The minimum focus distance is reduced to a few centimetres. On the other hand you lose infinity focus. BTW, for the photos posted I used Soligor 25mm tube.
The idea to use eos mount AF extension tube (instead of a native one) is simple: instead of buying an extension tube for each lens system it's enough to buy just one, i.e. for eos mount. In this way I can use this extension tube with each lens I have (i.e. nikkors, leica, yashica etc.). Of course,I assume we still have appropriate lens adapters.
Is there a made in Germany Cron 90? What is the diff between a Leitz and a Leica Cron 90. Both seems to be the the last pre-APO version as can be seen from the single hood.
ManWearPants wrote:
Is there a made in Germany Cron 90? What is the diff between a Leitz and a Leica Cron 90. Both seems to be the the last pre-APO version as can be seen from the single hood.n
According to pebbleplace (http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Leica_db.html) there were 2 versions of Leica 90/2.0 introduced before APO version hit the market (2002):
1st ver. -years 1969-1986
2nd ver.- years 1986-2002
However despite the fact that both versions were supposed to have built-in hood, mine doesn't have it. So there must have been some more variations.
Probably all of them were designated as "LEITZ Summicron - R" (some of them also had additional designaion: "Canada"). Newer version is also marked by "E55" designation (it's the one from your photo and probably the most popular version). It seems that optical formula (5 elements in 5 groups) has not changed over the years.
shaunmlavery wrote:
If it is one thing I hate, it is trying to figure out leica's lens variations. The thought of it just makes me want to vomit.
Doesn't the M mount have like 5 or so?
What I always try to do when buying leica lenses is just buy the one before the newest.
The R's have not had very many variations at all so are really quite simple to work out for any specific lens. The M's are another matter altogether but they've also been around a lot longer.
AL Shooter wrote:
According to pebbleplace (http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Leica_db.html) there were 2 versions of Leica 90/2.0 introduced before APO version hit the market (2002):
1st ver. -years 1969-1986
2nd ver.- years 1986-2002
However despite the fact that both versions were supposed to have built-in hood, mine doesn't have it. So there must have been some more variations.
Either the hood was removed from yours, or yours is a rangefinder version. All variants of the 90mm Summicron-R were made with a built-in hood.
AL Shooter wrote:
Probably all of them were designated as "LEITZ Summicron - R" (some of them also had additional designaion: "Canada"). Newer version is also marked by "E55" designation (it's the one from your photo and probably the most popular version). It seems that optical formula (5 elements in 5 groups) has not changed over the years.
A change in corporate ownership reflects the change from "Leitz" to "Leica" markings.
shaunmlavery wrote:
If it is one thing I hate, it is trying to figure out leica's lens variations. The thought of it just makes me want to vomit.
What merits the $2k price? I expected to see some bargain prices since the R line is discontinued, but clearly, that is not the case.
