Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:15 AM 4/22/98 +0200, you wrote: >Yes, I do think that some Leica lenses are optically overvalued.For >instance in the M system : noctilux (oops !), summilux 50, summicron >90,tele-elmar.All these lenses have an old optical design while films have >been hugely improved. But Leica is now on the road again with marvelous These lenses were and are oustanding, for their day. Sure the Noctilux doesn't fit one magazine's criterion, but you have to ask yourself if they are testing for the right things. I dare say Leica has a lot more sophisticated equipment to test with, but more important, have the inside scoop on why the designed it the way they did. Plus, there are rumors since two Photokinas ago that the Noctilux will be replaced soon, like maybe even this current Photokina. They improved it a while back, but not optically. But hundreds of testimonies of how great that lens is makes a lot more impact than some magazine review. Leica does have a motivation to protect its image, but they are THE MOST honest company when it comes to lens performance I have ever seen. They will tell you their 35 Summilux R vignette's a bit wide open. But Nikon won't. Ask also what motivations a magazine has to be "honest" about a company that doesn't do a lot of advertising with them compared to one that does. (Peterson's Photographic or Pop Photo). ========== Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch I exist as I am - that is enough. - - Walt Whitman