Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Fuji X Series > Fuji X Lenses & Images

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Fuji 35mm f/1.4 lens... Your comments?
Old 04-26-2012   #1
BobYIL
Registered User
 
BobYIL's Avatar
 
BobYIL is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,266
Fuji 35mm f/1.4 lens... Your comments?

It was obvious thru some initial reviews that this lens is an impressive one.

I am yet to see the detailed MTF curves other than the simple ones in the Fujifilm site however the 100% corner crops at various apertures by some owners have led me to believe that this lens is a real gem; reflecting the extensive optical engineering expertise of Fuji from the tiny lenses for the P&S cameras up to the current Hasselblad array to Large Format series to zooms for pro Studio TV cameras. Fuji decades long have been regarded as somewhat Japan's equivalent for what Zeiss is to Germany.

Yesterday Ken Rockwell has issued his review about this lens. For me, he is not a reliable source to be taken with much seriousity like some established lens test sites deserve, however some comments and especially the photos in his review are quite remarkable.

http://kenrockwell.com/fuji/x-mount-lenses/35mm-f14.htm

"This Fuji 35mm f/1.4 is an aspherical 50mm-equivalant lens with performance better than LEICA's equivalent LEICA SUMMILUX-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH."

I would like to listen to what some our forum's members who own the X-Pro1 as well as the Summilux 50mm Asph. with the M9s would comment on the subject. Perhaps just for the sake of this lens alone the X-Pro1 is worth to buy.

Regards,

Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #2
smile
why so serious?
 
smile's Avatar
 
smile is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Age: 33
Posts: 140
simply marketing
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #3
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 42
Posts: 16,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by smile View Post
simply marketing
You've tested both and come to this conclusion?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #4
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 49
Posts: 4,248
In his initial review, RFF's own Dante Stella also refers to the X-Pro1's "closed loop" focusing as making a major contribution to the system's performance w/all lenses, not just the 35mm, e.g., focus shift can be addressed without fancy floating lens elements.

"The 35mm Fujinon - which is easy to initially dismiss as a kit lens or skip because you "don't need a 50mm-style lens" - actually has stunning performance. Part of this, no doubt, is the camera's ability to focus in a closed-loop system. So when an aperture change makes the focus point shift, the camera can compensate. Many traditional rangefinder lenses simply can't do this."

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/xpro1.html
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.

--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #5
Spyro
Registered User
 
Spyro is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Melbourne, VIC, Oz
Posts: 921
it's a very nice lens
I've never had a summi though so no idea how it compares
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #6
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 50
Posts: 4,707
Hmm.. I've never owned the ASPH but I own the 50 pre-ASPH. That said, it's a nice lens yes... is it equal to Leica's 50 ASPH? Don't know. I recognize who is providing that comparison. I bet Erwin Puts would say something completely different.

Or not.

It's a really nice lens

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #7
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 2,493
Not sure you can compare a lens designed to fit a 24mm X 16mm sensor with one designed to cover a 36mm X 24mm sensor. Seems to me that different design criteria would be used.

But I'm not surprised that Rockwell would make such a statement.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:

http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #8
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 593
I deleted all the words I typed after I saw Mr. Rockwell's name.

Why so serious?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #9
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,070
In my experience the Fujinon 35/1.4 lens will not limit anybody's ability to produce outstanding photographs. The Fujinon 35/1.4 is optimized for the XP-1 body. I really don't care how it compares technically to other lenses. The lens and sensor work together to produce excellent results. I think people tend to discount the importance of microlense-sensor compatibility. It's tempting to think of sensors as digital film. Don't do that.

The longitudinal CA artifacts that plagues the current fast Nikkors seems low on the Fujinon.

It seems to me Fuji worked hard to achieve pleasant OOF rendering.

I would not expect to see first-class macro results until f 4.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com, FLICKR,
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #10
majid
Fazal Majid
 
majid's Avatar
 
majid is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 530
Erwin Puts is actually quite positive on this lens:

http://www.imx.nl/photo/page152/file...arch-2012.html

Quote:
The 1.4/35mm lens is unexpectedly good and is capable of challenging the Leica Summilux-M 1.4/50mm ASPH, the reigning champion of high-speed standard lenses for precision miniature cameras.
Given his critical take in the past on non-Leica lenses, this is high praise indeed.

As for Ken Rockwell, he certainly has entertainment value, but he makes (a lot of) money from affiliate referral commissions by Adorama et al, so he has a direct financial incentive to stoke GAS and equipment churn. Take everything he says with a metric ton of salt. This is a guy who has no problem reviewing lenses he admits he has never even used, after all. Rockwell claims the 50mm Summicron is superior in sharpness to the 50mm Summilux ASPH. I have owned both (and still own the ASPH), and that claim is sheer nonsense. The 50mm cron does have nicer bokeh, but the 50mm lux is sharper yet.

What would be a good comparison test of the lenses? If I get the time this weekend, I may take some comparative shots.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #11
intheviewfinder
Rich Beaubien
 
intheviewfinder's Avatar
 
intheviewfinder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bolton MA USA
Posts: 182
As much as I dislike Ken's tactics in order to generate revenue from his site I tend to somewhat agree with him. Though I've only had the XP1 and the 35mm a short while, it definitely compares quite favorably to an M9 with the Summilux 50mm. At a fraction of the cost (90% of the Leica for just 15% the cost) I can see a lot of folks skipping the M route. I'm afraid in fact it may be that as these sorts of cameras take off we will see the relegating of Leica to boutiques and as a status symbol, unless of course they have something revolutionary up their sleeves.

--Rich
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #12
lam
Dave
 
lam's Avatar
 
lam is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 952
I've owned my XP1/35 1.4 for approx. 3 days, every shot i've taken with the combo has just amazed me.

More so than when I owned an M8 with a 35 ASPH, or Biogon..

I agree with comments above about being optimized for smaller sensor etc, but I can honestly say I don't care because the combo has just blown me away.. and like Rich has just mentioned, this literally has curbed my appetite for an M9..!

-Dave
__________________
website | flickr | tumblr | twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #13
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 50
Posts: 4,707
Regarding the curbing of ones appetite for an M9 - I would concur with that statement.

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #14
ZlatkoBatistich
Registered User
 
ZlatkoBatistich's Avatar
 
ZlatkoBatistich is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobYIL View Post
"This Fuji 35mm f/1.4 is an aspherical 50mm-equivalant lens with performance better than LEICA's equivalent LEICA SUMMILUX-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH."
Easy to say, but where is the side-by-side comparison of the lenses? Is it actually "better"? If so, it should be easy to show. The problem with KR is that unreliability is his modus operandi.


The Leica 50/1.4 ASPH is acknowledged to be the best 50. Being better than that would be pretty amazing, especially at the Fuji's price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #15
chris00nj
Young Luddite
 
chris00nj's Avatar
 
chris00nj is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Age: 38
Posts: 1,016
There is a Flickr group with over a 1,000 images. Look at results instead of MTF charts.
__________________
My Camera Family


Flickr

Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #16
BobYIL
Registered User
 
BobYIL's Avatar
 
BobYIL is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZlatkoBatistich View Post
Easy to say, but where is the side-by-side comparison of the lenses? Is it actually "better"? If so, it should be easy to show. The problem with KR is that unreliability is his modus operandi.


The Leica 50/1.4 ASPH is acknowledged to be the best 50. Being better than that would be pretty amazing, especially at the Fuji's price.
Would you take a look at here? All the Leica lenses there are Aspherical versions (check through corners too):

http://picabroad.com/2012/03/24/fuji...-mount-lenses/

(By clicking on each picture the full-size versions 4896x3264 can be achieved.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #17
Penceler
Registered User
 
Penceler is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
Regarding the curbing of ones appetite for an M9 - I would concur with that statement.
Would agree as well and certainly curbs any interest I may have had in an M8. Also ditto comments on how good that lens/sensor combo is - best surprise I've had in some time.

John
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #18
ZlatkoBatistich
Registered User
 
ZlatkoBatistich's Avatar
 
ZlatkoBatistich is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobYIL View Post
Would you take a look at here? All the Leica lenses there are Aspherical versions (check through corners too):

http://picabroad.com/2012/03/24/fuji...-mount-lenses/

(By clicking on each picture the full-size versions 4896x3264 can be achieved.)
Thanks for the link. Both lenses look truly fantastic but the Leica looks a bit better, as it should for the price. I'm honestly not seeing KR's claim that the Fuji is better in these examples.

The Leica is showing a bit more detail for things that are in focus, but then it should as the magnification of a 50 is greater than that of a 35mm when mounted on the same camera. At f/1.4 the Leica is also showing shallower depth of field than the Fuji, so its out of focus areas look less sharp than those of the Fuji 35. It's still a good comparison, showing that the Fuji 35 offers superb quality.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #19
BobYIL
Registered User
 
BobYIL's Avatar
 
BobYIL is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZlatkoBatistich View Post
Thanks for the link. Both lenses look truly fantastic but the Leica looks a bit better, as it should for the price. I'm honestly not seeing KR's claim that the Fuji is better in these examples.

The Leica is showing a bit more detail for things that are in focus, but then it should as the magnification of a 50 is greater than that of a 35mm when mounted on the same camera. At f/1.4 the Leica is also showing shallower depth of field than the Fuji, so its out of focus areas look less sharp than those of the Fuji 35. It's still a good comparison, showing that the Fuji 35 offers superb quality.
Did you look at the edges and corners?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #20
ZlatkoBatistich
Registered User
 
ZlatkoBatistich's Avatar
 
ZlatkoBatistich is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobYIL View Post
Did you look at the edges and corners?
Yes, but it's not a clear comparison there as the subject matter along the edges and corners is different due to one being a 50 and the other a 35. It is very clear that the Leica 50 is not focused on the wall, but rather a few inches nearer. Look at the vine near the center (where it crosses over the black pipe) and the leaves at the bottom left. So it's not going to show the wall in focus anywhere. At the same time, the Fuji is showing a little greater depth of field as it is a 35. It is not an exact comparison, and I'm not sure it is possible to make an exact comparison.

I think it's fair to say that the Fuji is great for the price. It's just that KR's claim is not worth discussing without some direct evidence, and he doesn't offer any. His method is to make bold statements, truth be damned. But the only thing reliable in his reviews are the manufacturers' data, such as the size and weight of a lens. He is defiantly unreliable. On his About page, he describes his web site as his "aggressive personal opinion," and not a "logical presentation of fact." As he says, "I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax."
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #21
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 42
Posts: 16,960
The fact that people are even discussing this lens in relation to one of Leica's best tells you something. It doesn't matter if it is as good or better when pixel peeping. It's enough for it to be even close IMO (which I have no clue if it is).
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-26-2012   #22
aleksanderpolo
Registered User
 
aleksanderpolo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 185
They also said x100 is a leica killer and has the best 35mm eq lens ever. Until I see it side by side:

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/styled-3/x1.html

So until I see a side by side comparison with ASPH+M9, I cannot be sure.

Interestingly, the test result of the Panny 25/1.4 on the lowly m4/3 is better than 50/1.4 ASPH on M9P, so perhaps it is easier to make sharper lens for smaller format than for 35mm.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...dg/tloader.htm
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...ff/tloader.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-27-2012   #23
lam
Dave
 
lam's Avatar
 
lam is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 952
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics.. mind you they are not scientifically metered in anyway, just shooting like people take photos!

M9 with Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH, 200 ISO f1.4 1/25th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 1250 ISO f1.4 1/148th

I've got some more shots taken with the M9 and a Summilux 50mm f1.4 non-asph i'll put up later, for fun... I used the same ISO with those shots.. It's very fun shooting both, obviously, even better when you can talk light-hearted about both and enjoy shooting.
__________________
website | flickr | tumblr | twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #24
ColSebastianMoran
Registered User
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by lam View Post
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics..
Obviously a comparison to an M9 image is a tough comparison.

The Fuji image looks excellent, and it was at ISO 1200.

Thanks for the sample!
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)
Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #25
lam
Dave
 
lam's Avatar
 
lam is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 952
Ah your reply reminded me I was going to post some 50 Summilux shots...

Both shots taken the same location, same 400 ISO.

M9 with Summilux 50mm f1.4 Pre-ASPH, 400 ISO f1.4 1/70th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 400 ISO f1.4 1/90th


and one more stopped slightly down, with higher ISO..

M9 with Summilux 50mm f1.4 Pre-ASPH, 1250 ISO f2.8 1/60th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 1250 ISO f2.8 1/80th

Again, not scientific by any means, if anything I was just seeing if I still wanted an M9..
__________________
website | flickr | tumblr | twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #26
Merkin
For the Weekend
 
Merkin is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by lam View Post
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics.. mind you they are not scientifically metered in anyway, just shooting like people take photos!

M9 with Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH, 200 ISO f1.4 1/25th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 1250 ISO f1.4 1/148th

I've got some more shots taken with the M9 and a Summilux 50mm f1.4 non-asph i'll put up later, for fun... I used the same ISO with those shots.. It's very fun shooting both, obviously, even better when you can talk light-hearted about both and enjoy shooting.
Just judging by the shutter speeds used, I don't know if it is an apt comparison.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #27
fireblade
Vincenzo.
 
fireblade's Avatar
 
fireblade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZlatkoBatistich View Post
........... but the Leica looks a bit better, as it should for the price.
right there ^^ is where you undid yourself ..... you bought price into the factor ..... so your subconscious mind is not happy that Fuji is so much cheaper yet just as good ???
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #28
skibeerr
Registered User
 
skibeerr's Avatar
 
skibeerr is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Melbourne Vic
Age: 54
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by fireblade View Post
right there ^^ is where you undid yourself ..... you bought price into the factor ..... so your subconscious mind is not happy that Fuji is so much cheaper yet just as good ???


What a load of Bollocks!

He's just saying the Leica lens is a bit better for (a lot) more money.

A problem every engineer knows.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #29
intheviewfinder
Rich Beaubien
 
intheviewfinder's Avatar
 
intheviewfinder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bolton MA USA
Posts: 182
As I said earlier the XP1 with a 35mm - it definitely compares quite favorably to an M9 with a Summilux 50mm. As you can see it does a nice job of reproducing that Leica look. In fact at this point, on occasion the XP1/35mm combo will produce a better photo but I'm not sure it will do it consistently. The thing is at 15% the cost, it certainly is a more than viable alternative for a lot of folks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-28-2012   #30
fireblade
Vincenzo.
 
fireblade's Avatar
 
fireblade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by skibeerr View Post
What a load of Bollocks!
He's just saying the Leica lens is a bit better for (a lot) more money.
A problem every engineer knows.

lol...read what i wrote carefully and slowly..... its not about the lenses in question....its about his thought process...whether leica is better, whether fuji is better, dont care.
understand now....he wants leica to be better
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2013   #31
irq506
just curious
 
irq506's Avatar
 
irq506 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
You've tested both and come to this conclusion?
I have!
At one point i had the capability of doing just that.
i tested them both in extremes and using a Collimator and again using pointed sources of light and again focus testing using aperture control as well as visual testing, and again by actual use, and in every single test the Fuji 35/1.4 came out "better".
Same with the 18mm vs the 28 Summicron and the 28 elmarit.
At this point its just sour grapes between Leica and everyone else when it comes to sitting down and making really high performance lenses, almost all of the manufacturers out there now, when they choose to, make lenses that are exceptional and brilliant.
Zeiss's new 55 lens for $4000 look to make that Leica 50 f2 lens look a little less brilliant and at half the price.
To my mind Leica are rapidly becoming boutique equipment manufacturer and their belief in them making "the very best there is" is rapidly becoming challenged across the board.
__________________
the journey is the destination
http://www.flickr.com/photos/devtank
http://www.devtank.com

I have only good gear.
  Reply With Quote

New Fuji Xpro1 owner
Old 10-18-2013   #32
Vincent512
Vinny the Lens
 
Vincent512's Avatar
 
Vincent512 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 42
New Fuji Xpro1 owner

My Xpro 1 and 18mm and 35mm lens came in last night ...updated all of the firmware ....camera is amazing ...I have owned an original x100, Pentax K-10s, 20's and K-5 cameras with limited glass. I have Canon 5dmk II's and all L glass plus Leica M6 and Summicron glass and I have to say the Xpro1 is outstanding from some of the test shots I did yesterday. The lens and camera are not as heavy or solid feeling as the Leica stuff but what the camera can do does not leave you wanting. I am very excited about this camera. A big improvement over the x100 I use to own. The way things are going I might sell my Canon gear and buy the next Fuji x pro model that comes out to do my photo work with. I think people do too much testing and pixel peeping instead of shooting photos. The 35mm 1.4 Fuji lens is very sharp and works well. I do not regret buying the 35mm lens. I think it works and looks just as good as any other lens I have. I know each lens has a different character to them but as far as image quality it seems very good to me.
__________________
www.vincentgargano.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2013   #33
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 48
Posts: 5,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by intheviewfinder View Post
As I said earlier the XP1 with a 35mm - it definitely compares quite favorably to an M9 with a Summilux 50mm. As you can see it does a nice job of reproducing that Leica look. In fact at this point, on occasion the XP1/35mm combo will produce a better photo but I'm not sure it will do it consistently. The thing is at 15% the cost, it certainly is a more than viable alternative for a lot of folks.
I guess it's safe to say....

Fuji can do Leica better than Leica can do Fuji
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:28.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.