Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960926140035.006af690@roanoke.infi.net> > At 07:11 AM 9/26/96 -0400, Ken Wilcox wrote: > > > >The 20mm Russian will work with the camera but is not optically > >up to Leica standards. It is, however, MUCH less expensive than the > >21mm > Super-Angulon. > > I'm really not certain I'd agree with this, as it depends what optical > characteristic you're analyzing. The Russar is a Topogon clone, and as > such > suffers from the slow speed inherent in that design. But it is a bit > sharper, has less distortion, and less edge fade-out than the > Super-Angulon > design. The Topogon is a superlative design and, for all its slowness, > is > quite competitive today. Of course, Russian quality control is sloppy, > sloppy, sloppy, and some of these lenses are undoubtedly dogs. But the > most > of them seem quite sound performers and certainly most of those who use > them > seem content with their qualities. I haven't seen Ken Wilcox's entire message yet (something amis here, perhaps), but I'm interested in your comment about "less edge fade-out", because the man in the shop today said they vignetted badly. He also said that he didn't see the point in putting a non-Leitz lens on a Leica, and I could understand that. But is the vignetting a real problem? The one I've seen is only UKP260 with finder, I could *never* justify a Super-Angulon.