Fred Miranda wrote: jamato8 wrote: GMPhotography wrote:
jamato8 wrote:
I have read that no one is having any luck with the 135L working.
Bummer such a great lens. Let\'s hope the 200 works
Tell me about it. I was so looking forward to using the 135L. I have the 70-200 II so I am glad to read it works well. Now to test my latest favorite and oh so sharp, 100-400II, 11-24 and then the 24-70II. I hope the 100L macro works, but I see no reason it shouldn\'t. On another forum I see nothing but raves now that the camera has gotten into some users hands. It seems to be exceeding many peoples expectations. Even the DO 70-300 (or whatever it is) works well.
Did you try your 135L? I am still hoping it will be ok. If the 135L does not work, the 400 f/5.6L shouldn\'t be any different (older AF design).
Not having great luck. A big use lens, the 100-400II isn\'t working well at all and on 400 not at all.
With Leica lenses so far the 50 pre ASPH is fine and the DR, my 35 ASPH isn\'t bad at all but the corners are not great but for some work it would be fine. The 90 pre ASPH Summicron, just prior to ASPH is fine.
35L fine
70-200L II so-so
11-24L ok, still need some more time.
In general I am finding too much hunting and if the areas doesn\'t have good contrast and or a decent line, fair for lock on. I am still on the learning curve as this is the first mirrorless I have ever handled.
I did the Metabones IV update but I am not sure if it went right as it just says OK and never updated. The IV I got has the grayish paint inside not the T version so I am sending it back.
