Re: [Leica] sharpness

["Dan S" <dstate1@hotmail.com>]

Take a look at the PHOTODO sites write up on resolution and film.  You may 
want to retest using another film...Tri-X is wonderful stuff, but its 
sharpness is nowhere near the maximum performance of either the Canon or the 
Leica.  A more interesting comparison would be on Tech Pan developed in 
Technidol.  This film exceeds the resolution of pretty much any lens I can 
think of, and it will take the film out of the equation completely.

Best Wishes

Dan States



>
>I just ran a test pitting the following lenses against each other at all
>apertures on 'real world subjects' (ie some stuff in my back garden, using
>Tri-X in Xtol 1:1). Not Erwin-quality testing, obviously, but...
>
>LTM Russar 20/5.6
>LTM Canon 28/2.8
>M Summilux 35/1.4
>
>Sigma FD 24/2.8
>Canon FD 28/2.8
>Canon FD 35/2
>
>I used a tripod, but in other respects I wanted this to be like the way I
>shoot day to day. The reason was that three of the lenses were new and I
>wanted to check them out.
>
>Easily the winners were the Canon and Leica 35s, though at f8 all of the
>lenses with the possible exception of the Russar were very sharp (the 
>Russar
>doesn't do well at the edges, but then no big surprise there).
>
>At f8 and 5.6 respectively I could not detect a difference between the 
>Canon
>and the Leica lenses, in sharpness at least. There is certainly a 
>difference
>in character, however, which I am at a loss to describe.
>
>The old Canon 28 is surprisingly good, too.
>
>What is absolutely clear from my testing is that the great limiting factor
>in the sharpness of my pix is my technique. ALL of the lenses easily
>outperform my ability hold the camera steady at speeds lower than 1/250.
>
>I just bought a scanner. When the transparency hood arrives I'll post the
>results to my up and coming website.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com