Funny you should mention the 300. I remember when I handled Jim's thinking "this sucker is far lighter than I would have thought..". I won't look up the numbers, but having owned the EoS 300/2.8 (non-IS), I'd call it an easier lug-around than the Canon. Surprised me as I envisioned this Hubble-like behemoth.
The 300 APO is on the list, but so are a lot of other things. Right now my 200APO and 1.4x do an amazing job. Jim hefted my 200 on his 1D2 (or 5D can't recall), twisted the focus ring a couple of times - then bought one. :clap: I don't think he ever hit the shutter. Offered to lend it to him as we could only meet for a couple of minutes, but I guess knowing the IQ of the 300, he knew what he'd be getting.
I REALLY liked my Leica 180s, but I would call both Mamiya 200 and the Cv 180/4 as the crown princes to the Leica's King. The CV and Mamiya I'd call at par in terms of resolving power with one another, bokeh of all three on par. However, I do prefer the color native from the Mamiya over the CV or Leica's. One advantage of the Mamiya over the CV is the ability to use a TC - and any TC at that (will adapt to it).
The Leica would have an edge in terms of resolution, but either of the alternatives above are so close it' not even funny. You may notice a difference at 100% on screen. In prints, I'd doubt it.
Actually, I just finished printing a medium-sized (13x19) color image on Epson VFA taken last year with my 5D and 180/2.8 APO for a charity auction and either of the CV or Mamiya could have matched what I'm seeing in terms of print resolution, color, contrast, etc. I've done the same print at 17x 22 and would say the same.
Using the Mamiya on a FF dslr gives sweet results, but it must be something on a MFDB unit with those nice fat CCD sensels and skinny DoF - as per John Black's website.
The Leica kicks butt w/o question, but as Guy put it the 200 APO (or IMHO CV 180/4) at $600ish is just "..killer". Hey, if I can save $1200+ and be close enough to tap on a Leica APOs shoulder (saw same with my 90AA R and Cv 90/3.5 APO) , I'm a happy camper :thumbs:
Thanks for the comparison info.
Only 130 grams more than the Leica, not bad. I would have thought it would have been more. 11.5mm more length would be more noticeable as far as balance. Definitely, alot cheaper than the Leica.The Mamiya 300 2.8 would be a great deal considering the price of ones from Canon/Nikon.Sounds like you will be getting one of these soon, thanks to trying out Jim's.
I love my Leica 180 APO 2.8, so sharp wide open its amazing and with the 2x Leica extender I can get a surprisingly good 360mm 5.6.
Is the Mamiya 200 2.8 as sharp as the Leica 180 2.8 at f2.8? Just curious?