chris_tribble Posted October 1, 2012 Share #1  Posted October 1, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) While I'm certain that the APO is better than the earlier version, I'd be really grateful if anyone could comment on how much better it is. I've just got hold of a clean R 80-200 f4 ROM and am looking at options for extending my range. Obviously at some point getting a longer prime (or something like the Contax 70-300 f4-f5.6?) will be better, but in the first instance an extender might not be a disaster.  The problem is that the APO versions are rare and significantly more expensive than the earlier version (£500 or so vs as little as £90). What with getting an M and then eventually getting rid of my Canon stuff (and maybe my 2 M9s so that I can have a pair of matched M bodies) it's going to be an expensive period. While I know that you don't lose money on 2nd hand glass, there's a limit on the money I want to layout too!  Comments + examples of images taken with equivalent setups gratefully received Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted October 1, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted October 1, 2012 Chris, I can only speak in favour of the APO Extender, and not make a comparative judgment. It is really excellent. However, there are several members of this Forum, whose judgment I respect greatly, who say that in comparison the earlier non APO variant is very disappointing. Chalk and cheese. I would lay out the cash - the result would be a lot better than "not a disaster". The non-ROM APO version is a bit cheaper than the ROM version; of course if you're going to use it with an M you won't need the ROM facility. You'll also need to factor in the cost of a really decent tripod, if you don't have one. With a maximum aperture of f/8 and a focal length of up to 400 I couldn't do without! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share #3  Posted October 1, 2012 Chris, I can only speak in favour of the APO Extender, and not make a comparative judgment. It is really excellent. However, there are several members of this Forum, whose judgment I respect greatly, who say that in comparison the earlier non APO variant is very disappointing. Chalk and cheese. I would lay out the cash - the result would be a lot better than "not a disaster". The non-ROM APO version is a bit cheaper than the ROM version; of course if you're going to use it with an M you won't need the ROM facility. You'll also need to factor in the cost of a really decent tripod, if you don't have one. With a maximum aperture of f/8 and a focal length of up to 400 I couldn't do without!  John, thanks for the comment. Obviously, after being used to a Canon f2.8 300 for when I need to go long, the idea of anything that reduces the maximum aperture is a bit of a bummer. Such a shame that the x1.4 Apo extender doesn't appear to work with the 80-200.  The tripod I have - and certainly wouldn't even consider trying to handhold something like this  Ah, decisions, decisions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted October 1, 2012 Share #4  Posted October 1, 2012 John, thanks for the comment. Obviously, after being used to a Canon f2.8 300 for when I need to go long, the idea of anything that reduces the maximum aperture is a bit of a bummer. Such a shame that the x1.4 Apo extender doesn't appear to work with the 80-200.  The tripod I have - and certainly wouldn't even consider trying to handhold something like this  Ah, decisions, decisions.  Chris, I've just been looking in Brian Bower's book Leica Reflex Photography. If what he says is to be believed, it's even more of a bummer:  A Leica designed lens built to Leica specification by Kyocera of Japan. Another extremely fine performer providing near prime lens quality. The closest focussing distance is a very useful 1.1m and this provides an image ratio of 1:3.9 at the 200mm setting. Can be used with the 2x Apo extender but best performance with this combination requires that the lens be stopped down one or two stops.  If he's right, it doesn't give a lot of leeway then! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted October 1, 2012 Share #5 Â Posted October 1, 2012 Chris - Â I bought my 80-200 and 2X APO at the end of 1999. Six weeks later when I brought prints 11 x 14 inch from using that combination, hand held, back to the excellent shop where I bought the gear the owner was amazed at how much improved the the APO version was. Those shots were wide open. You can see many wildlife photos on my site, most shot with the 80-200 & 2X APO, though not the shots from Antarctica since my R8 and that lens were in Solmes for service. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share #6  Posted October 1, 2012 A Leica designed lens built to Leica specification by Kyocera of Japan. Another extremely fine performer providing near prime lens quality. The closest focussing distance is a very useful 1.1m and this provides an image ratio of 1:3.9 at the 200mm setting. Can be used with the 2x Apo extender but best performance with this combination requires that the lens be stopped down one or two stops. John - this is interesting. Thanks. Are you sure that Bamber's talking about the last version of this lens? The one I've bought is shown here: Leica R VARIO-ELMAR 4/80-200 4 80-200mm E60 ROM für R7 / R8 / R9 | eBay My understanding is that this one was designed and built by Leica on the basis of the 70-180 APO. Puts comments on it are very positive...  re the whole issue of using an extender, I'll be mulling this over and may look around for a used Nikon or Canon FD f2.8 prime - I'll be trading in an EOS non IS version of this once I've got everything sorted and this should balance out.  Thanks for your input. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share #7 Â Posted October 1, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Chris -Â I bought my 80-200 and 2X APO at the end of 1999. Six weeks later when I brought prints 11 x 14 inch from using that combination, hand held, back to the excellent shop where I bought the gear the owner was amazed at how much improved the the APO version was. Â Stuart - this is useful to know. What do you reckon on low light / stage lighting with this combination. I'm not sure if the M high ISO will compensate for having to work at f8! Â Thanks... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted October 1, 2012 Share #8  Posted October 1, 2012 John - this is interesting. Thanks. Are you sure that Bamber's talking about the last version of this lens? The one I've bought is shown here:Leica R VARIO-ELMAR 4/80-200 4 80-200mm E60 ROM für R7 / R8 / R9 | eBay My understanding is that this one was designed and built by Leica on the basis of the 70-180 APO. Puts comments on it are very positive...  re the whole issue of using an extender, I'll be mulling this over and may look around for a used Nikon or Canon FD f2.8 prime - I'll be trading in an EOS non IS version of this once I've got everything sorted and this should balance out.  Thanks for your input.  Chris, yes I think Bower was talkig about the 11280 latest non-ROM version (the ROM version is I think optically the same). With regard to the latest lens, Puts says:  With an Apo-Extender-R 2x we get a 160mm to 400mm lens at aperture 1:8. This combination is not the best there is for handheld shooting, but on a tripod and stopped down to 1:11 it helps you to bring home exciting picures at long range  But Stu is happy with the performance wide-open, and I really am more than happy to take his word for it over Bower and Puts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share #9 Â Posted October 1, 2012 John - thanks for doing further research - I'd not checked the compendium! Well - I've taken the plunge as another member of the list PM'd me with information on a good deal for a x2 APO, so I'll now be placed to see if how well works! If it doesn't, at the price I've been able to get it for, I don't think I'll lose as they seem to be desirable objects. Â I can see it's going to be interesting days come 2013 and when ever the M actually arrives. In the meantime I'll have to possess my soul in patience! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted October 1, 2012 Share #10 Â Posted October 1, 2012 Chris - Â You'll only get clear stage shots when the action is paused or at a peak moment (about to reverse). Otherwise the performers' movement will blur. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 2, 2012 Author Share #11 Â Posted October 2, 2012 Chris -Â You'll only get clear stage shots when the action is paused or at a peak moment (about to reverse). Otherwise the performers' movement will blur. Â Stuart - I'm horribly aware of this. I think what I'll have to do is to play with the M when I get it but not assume that I'll be able to (part) fund its purchase with the sale of my Canon stuff. While the M with EVF may work well up to 200 for some kinds of work, (the 80-200 I've just got looks as if it might beat my 70-200 2.8 IS in some ares - but that's not certain either), it's not going to beat the 5D2 + the EOS 300 f2.8L! Â Looking back through the archive I've got too many shots at a 200mm focal length or higher where even at 2400 I was needing f2.8 to be able to get an exposure above 1/60th. Â What all this could mean is that the M will remain the core camera for me (as the M9 is), and that I'll get better use of my 90 / 135 lenses, AND that for travel I'll have a relatively light/compact 80-200 which I can take along for the ride. For those occasions in theatre / performance where I have to stay a long way back then I'll either need to keep the Canon + at least the 300, or look around for a Nikon 300 f4 to bolt on to the M+EVF. Â The main thing will be to test the capacity of the new system before dumping the DSLR if I want to keep on doing certain kinds of work (and meeting the needs of clients!) Â Thanks to everyone for their thoughtful and helpful comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topoxforddoc Posted October 4, 2012 Share #12  Posted October 4, 2012 Chris,  Stage/concert photography at F8 is going to be a real challenge. For most gigs/theatres I shoot 1/60th F4 at ASA1600 on film (pushed HP5/Neopan 400) with my M or at 1/60th F2.8 at ASA400 (DMR set to minus 1.0/2.0 EV depending on venue). Set up like that, I just need to worry about composition and timing. I don’t know how you’re going to shoot stage at F8!  Charlie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share #13  Posted October 5, 2012 Chris, I don’t know how you’re going to shoot stage at F8!  Charlie  Charlie - precisely my thought! The decision now is:  DOCUMENTARY / TRAVEL Leica M + normal range of M lenses + 80-200 f4 (and maybe the Apo x2 extender) will go in the big bag, with different selections for different contexts.  Practical example: I've got a commission in India coming up in which I'll be doing a lot of work in educational contexts where a long lens is a great advantage + I have to do some talking head video. This time I'm going to have to take both M bodies + lenses from 18 to 90, AND the 5D2 + 70-200 + maybe 24-70 for the video. That ends up a lot of weight. In the future I'll be able to cover the same task with a much lighter M only setup of 2 bodies + 18 through to 80-200 (with the prediction that I'll do most of it with 28 + 50 )  THEATRE / CONCERT Soundcheck / rehearsal - M + 28 through to 90 will do it (with 80-200 f4 in the bag) Concert / performance - I'll have to keep the 5D2 (I won't bother to "upgrade") + 70-200 f2.8 + 300 2.8  Thanks to everyone for thoughts and comments - things are looking clearer! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.