DJ, I do remember you saying that your bag is heavy. I like 5D more than 1DsII.
I am not able to compare Leica 100 2.8 + Elpro and Zeiss C-Y 100 2.8 because I don't have both.
What i can say is after extensive use of my Zeiss 100 2.8, numerous discussions in the forum, and deduction from my experience, I believe Zeiss 100 2.8 has a superior performance at high magnifications to the Leica counterparts.
Focusing from infinity to 1:1 magnification is a very long range. Leica covers this range by moving the whole set of lens elements forwards and backwards. This is the case in both Leica 60 2.8 and Leica 100 2.8. Further magnification is achieved by increasing the distance between the lens and the film by Elpro.
As my job does not allow me to manipulate with the lens and Elpro, we have no choice but to use Zeiss. Instead of lens extension, Zeiss cover the whole range by using floating elements. Apart from moving the whole set of lens elements, the lens elements also moves relative to each other in a very complex way.
The application of floating elements ensure good image quality even when you focus down to 1:1 magnification.
Zeiss applied floating elements in lens like 21 2.8, 28 2,60 2.8 macro, 85 1.2, 100 2.8 macro. These are exceptionally good lenses.
Leica also applied floating elements in the new M75 2 ASPH. This lens has very good image quality over all the focusing range.
I think it is a pity that Leica did not apply the floating elements into 100 2.8 and 60 2.8. Although these lenses have good performance at the normal range, at large magnifications there is room for improvements.
Son Minh Pham compared the two lenses Leica 100 2.8 and Zeiss C-Y 100 2.8, he came to the conclusion that Leica is better at normal range, but the performance is taken over by Zeiss at large magnifications.
I am not able to compare Leica 100 2.8 + Elpro and Zeiss C-Y 100 2.8 because I don't have both.
What i can say is after extensive use of my Zeiss 100 2.8, numerous discussions in the forum, and deduction from my experience, I believe Zeiss 100 2.8 has a superior performance at high magnifications to the Leica counterparts.
Focusing from infinity to 1:1 magnification is a very long range. Leica covers this range by moving the whole set of lens elements forwards and backwards. This is the case in both Leica 60 2.8 and Leica 100 2.8. Further magnification is achieved by increasing the distance between the lens and the film by Elpro.
As my job does not allow me to manipulate with the lens and Elpro, we have no choice but to use Zeiss. Instead of lens extension, Zeiss cover the whole range by using floating elements. Apart from moving the whole set of lens elements, the lens elements also moves relative to each other in a very complex way.
The application of floating elements ensure good image quality even when you focus down to 1:1 magnification.
Zeiss applied floating elements in lens like 21 2.8, 28 2,60 2.8 macro, 85 1.2, 100 2.8 macro. These are exceptionally good lenses.
Leica also applied floating elements in the new M75 2 ASPH. This lens has very good image quality over all the focusing range.
I think it is a pity that Leica did not apply the floating elements into 100 2.8 and 60 2.8. Although these lenses have good performance at the normal range, at large magnifications there is room for improvements.
Son Minh Pham compared the two lenses Leica 100 2.8 and Zeiss C-Y 100 2.8, he came to the conclusion that Leica is better at normal range, but the performance is taken over by Zeiss at large magnifications.
