Dear guys
I don't know much about the following lens. But I am willing to get one.
Which one has the best performance/price rate?
Leica 35-70/3.5 E67
Leica 35-70/3.5 E60
Contax 35-70/3.4
Contax 28-85
Leica 35-70/4
however the contax is cheaper
The contax 35-70. This lens is small, light cheap and good performer. However, there is a 'look' produced by leica and contax lenses so you might prefer the leica. The 28-85 is optically ok but has more laca; is large and heavy; suffers from zoom creep and is a bit more expensive. However, if you want the increase focal range it is well respected (the weight and zoom creep are big negatives for myself).
-
I have no personal experience with the leica so take these comments with a grain of salt.
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1282565455' post='2038']
The contax 35-70. This lens is small, light cheap and good performer. However, there is a 'look' produced by leica and contax lenses so you might prefer the leica. The 28-85 is optically ok but has more laca; is large and heavy; suffers from zoom creep and is a bit more expensive. However, if you want the increase focal range it is well respected (the weight and zoom creep are big negatives for myself).
-
I have no personal experience with the leica so take these comments with a grain of salt.
[/quote]
what does "more laca" mean?
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 22
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
8
[quote name='rhna' timestamp='1282644596' post='2097']
what does "more laca" mean?
[/quote]
Lateral CAs? Or a typo for loca, Longitudinal CAs.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....