28mm–70mm f/3.5–4.5 Vario Elmar-R

[ryee3]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does anyone like this particular zoom lens? Should I just stay away from it. It':)s pretty affordable. Thanks for your advice.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[veraikon]

As far as I know it is a relabeled Sigma Zoom , and the "weakest" Leica Zoom from newer production.

It was a beginners kit lens, which Leica offered to a "moderate" set price. (only a little bit over the price of the camera body only) . So it is very common - therefore the low second hand price.

"Weak" means it is not bad - but it is outperformed eg by the VE 4.0 35-70 .

[gvaliquette]

Pass on the Vario-Elmar-R 28/90. I do have one, and while I do use it, I do not like it. The sharpness is quite good but the distortion is high and often quite visible. I should have purchased the Vario-Elmar-R 35-70 instead, and both were at about the same price! Also, the lens has a so-called rotating mount, which is annoying when using polarizing filters. But, the Vario-Elmar-R 35-70 shares the same mount and will have the same annoying problem. On the other hand, from what I hear, the Vario-Elmar-R 35-70 has a quite functional MACRO function.

 

Guy

[earleygallery]

I considered a 35/70 to replace my 35 & 50 Summicron and 90 Elmarit. A quite and dirty test made my mind up to stick with what I have.

 

You can easily get away with just a 35 and 90 prime for most general photography.

[masjah]

The best solution is of course the much more recent 28-90 R, but cost is very significantly more. The Scottish Dealer has two, at £1499 anf £1599, but the lens is excellent, better than some of the primes at the wide end (apart from a slightly smaller aperture that is).

[sender]

I actually have this lens, and while it shows some barrel distortion at wide angle, it is not bad for the price. The single primes offer much better quality. I use it when convenience is of utmost importance.

[Mongo Park]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had one for several years in the mid 90 s and managed to get a few good shots with it. A major problem I found was its was the f/3.5-4.5 aperture - too slow. If money is an issue then its an entry into the R lens system. Otherwise I'd recommend the 35 - 70 as a better zoom. I prefer the R primes and moved on up when I could afford it. Perhaps a 50 summicron would be a good starting lens as they are fairly cheap at the moment. Superb lens when you get to know it.

[tobey bilek]

Mine is sharper than my 35/70, but te distortion is a killer. I will carry it when I need a zoom starting at 28 and distortion does not matter. At around 42 mm it has no distortion where it transitions from barrel to pin cushion.

 

Mine has the same mount as my 35/70 . Go the the setting, wide or narrow where the front extends a little, adjust your 60 mm B+W pola and zoom to where you want. Other wise the filter is burried where you can`t reach it.

 

Just do put the pola over a UV you forgot was there. It will vignette strongly.

[razerx]

I am about to buy this lens for my DMR so if you still haven't made a decision in about two weeks then send me a message and I'll give you a report. On FF I would go for the 35-70/4 but with the 1.37x crop factor the wide end is more useful and yes I wish I can pay 6x more for a 28-90!

[jc_braconi]

I have and use the second version of it with the R8/DMR and I am very satisfied with it.

if you want to see some pictures made with it, have a visit to my LFI gallery,

 

http://gallery.lfi-online.de/gallery//displayimage.php?album=3586&pos=37

http://gallery.lfi-online.de/gallery//displayimage.php?album=3586&pos=25

http://gallery.lfi-online.de/gallery//displayimage.php?album=3586&pos=26