[Leica] Report Vario-ELmar-R 1:4/35-70 part 2

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

- --============_-1281971506==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The performance at 70mm.
At full aperture the overall contrast is a bit less than with the 50
position. In the center the outlines have tightly drawn contours, necessary
for the sharpness impression. Very fine detail is clearly rendered with a
bit soft edges and extremely fine details are a bit fuzzy  and start to
overlap each other. In the field fine detail is quite crisply rendered and
extremely fine detail is just detectable.  The corners show a drop in micro
contrast and produce fuzzy detail.
Slight barrel distortion and a bit vignetting can be noted. Astigmatism is
very well controlled.
At f/5.6 the usual crispening over the whole image field is noticeable with
a faint improvement of the rendition of very fine details. At f/8 again
more contrast and ever finer detail is recorded, now extending into the far
corners. At f/16 the performance drops a bit.
Performance holds up to and including the macro position.

General remarks.
Centering is perfect. Veiling glare and secondary ghost images are in most
picture taking situations non-existent and hardly to just detectible in
adverse conditions
The lens is very smooth to operate. It makes a fine general purpose lens
for the R8 in all situations where f/4 is enough .
The only hassle I have with this lens on the R8 is the relatively low
brightness of the screen. A f/4 is a bit meagre here. Given the use of this
lens in mostly brighly lit situations a small nuisance. Handling is
intuitive and fast. The zoomrange of 2 times is not very impressive, but it
is remarkable how many picture taking situations can be handled with this
range.

The comparison.
Compared to the Summicron-R 2/35 and the Summilux 1,4/80 (the 90 would be
too long) at their f/4 aperture we see what we remarked in the beginning of
this report. A wide aperture lens has an inherently much higher aberration
content than a f/4 design and since the current crop of designers masters
the intricacies of zoomlenses quite well, we might expect that the fixed
focal length lenses are challenged. As they are indeed. The Summicron R 35
at f/4.0 shows a medium/ high contrast with a crispish rendition of
extremely fine detail on axis. In the field the outlines are sharply edged,
and very fine detail is rendered with soft edges in this zone  becoming
fuzzy in  the corners.  At 1 meter the image quality is less than in the
infinity position.
The Summilux-R 1,4/80 at f/4 has a high contrast image with on axis a clear
rendition of very fine detail,becoming  soft when looking at extremely fine
detail. In the field and the corners the softness at the edges extends in
area, becoming slightly fuzzy. Again the close-up performance is less than
in the infinity position. Side by side comparison shows that the Summicron
and Summilux have a bit less clarity and sparkle of very fine detail than
the Vario-Elmar-R , especially in the field. Some study clarifies this
behaviour. Looking at the rendition  of exceedingly fine detail we note
that this level of detail recording is beyond the capabilities of the
Summmicron-R and Summilux-R and just within recording level of the
Vario-Elmar-R.
The Vario-Elmar-R has a lower amount of residual aberrations and a better
balance of them. This will show especially in the overall sharpness
impression.
It is also understandable that the better performance in the field of the
Vario-Elmar-R will show in the center too and the somewhat lesser
performance in the field of the 'cron and 'lux will also have its effects
on the center and overall performance.
While it is convenient for a test to divide a lens in zones to describe its
performance, in practical photography  all zones and residual aberrations
contribute to the overall imagery of that lens. You have to sum all optical
performance aspects to get one overall quality impression. That is what
counts for the viewer and the user. Optical analysis can try to explain why
a certain lens has this behaviour or this image character, but the eye is
holistic. It captures the image as a whole.

Erwin
- --============_-1281971506==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"

<fontfamily><param>Times</param>The performance at 70mm.

At full aperture the overall contrast is a bit less than with the 50
position. In the center the outlines have tightly drawn contours,
necessary for the sharpness impression. Very fine detail is clearly
rendered with a bit soft edges and extremely fine details are a bit
fuzzy  and start to overlap each other. In the field fine detail is
quite crisply rendered and extremely fine detail is just detectable. 
The corners show a drop in micro contrast and produce fuzzy detail.

Slight barrel distortion and a bit vignetting can be noted. Astigmatism
is very well controlled.

At f/5.6 the usual crispening over the whole image field is noticeable
with a faint improvement of the rendition of very fine details. At f/8
again more contrast and ever finer detail is recorded, now extending
into the far corners. At f/16 the performance drops a bit. 

Performance holds up to and including the macro position. 

       

General remarks.

Centering is perfect. Veiling glare and secondary ghost images are in
most picture taking situations non-existent and hardly to just
detectible in adverse conditions

The lens is very smooth to operate. It makes a fine general purpose
lens for the R8 in all situations where f/4 is enough . 

The only hassle I have with this lens on the R8 is the relatively low
brightness of the screen. A f/4 is a bit meagre here. Given the use of
this lens in mostly brighly lit situations a small nuisance. Handling
is intuitive and fast. The zoomrange of 2 times is not very impressive,
but it is remarkable how many picture taking situations can be handled
with this range. 


The comparison.

Compared to the Summicron-R 2/35 and the Summilux 1,4/80 (the 90 would
be too long) at their f/4 aperture we see what we remarked in the
beginning of this report. A wide aperture lens has an inherently much
higher aberration content than a f/4 design and since the current crop
of designers masters the intricacies of zoomlenses quite well, we might
expect that the fixed focal length lenses are challenged. As they are
indeed. The Summicron R 35 at f/4.0 shows a medium/ high contrast with
a crispish rendition of extremely fine detail on axis. In the field the
outlines are sharply edged, and very fine detail is rendered with soft
edges in this zone  becoming  fuzzy in  the corners.  At 1 meter the
image quality is less than in the infinity position.

The Summilux-R 1,4/80 at f/4 has a high contrast image with on axis a
clear rendition of very fine detail,becoming  soft when looking at
extremely fine detail. In the field and the corners the softness at the
edges extends in area, becoming slightly fuzzy. Again the close-up
performance is less than in the infinity position. Side by side
comparison shows that the Summicron and Summilux have a bit less
clarity and sparkle of very fine detail than the Vario-Elmar-R ,
especially in the field. Some study clarifies this behaviour. Looking
at the rendition  of exceedingly fine detail we note that this level of
detail recording is beyond the capabilities of the Summmicron-R and
Summilux-R and just within recording level of the Vario-Elmar-R. 

The Vario-Elmar-R has a lower amount of residual aberrations and a
better balance of them. This will show especially in the overall
sharpness impression. 

It is also understandable that the better performance in the field of
the Vario-Elmar-R will show in the center too and the somewhat lesser
performance in the field of the 'cron and 'lux will also have its
effects on the center and overall performance. 

While it is convenient for a test to divide a lens in zones to describe
its performance, in practical photography  all zones and residual
aberrations contribute to the overall imagery of that lens. You have to
sum all optical performance aspects to get one overall quality
impression. That is what counts for the viewer and the user. Optical
analysis can try to explain why a certain lens has this behaviour or
this image character, but the eye is holistic. It captures the image as
a whole.   


Erwin</fontfamily>

- --============_-1281971506==_ma============--