Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Try your local library. I have researched and photocopied a number of old camera and lens tests that way. PopPhoto themselves sell camera and lens tests and they also publish an annual with all the recent tests. John Collier > From: "Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi> > > Maybe it would and I would like to but I do not have a scanner. > But these two PopPhoto tests I refer are not so ancient, Canon 1.4/35 is in > December 1999 and Leica 1.4/35 M ASPH is in January 2000 - of the Leica lens > they say "In terms of performance, this lens is unsurpassed and seldom > equalled among 14./35 mm optics." If you look at the charts, the Canon is > slightly better at full aperture but the Leica is slightly better at all other > apertures. BTW the Pentax 2.0/35 tested in the same issue as Canon gets better > ratings than both but it is not 1.4, of course. > I do not have tests of current Nikon primes at hand but the only tests I have > seen that Nikon is very good is among the 28-105 zooms - and these are not > very good in general. > All the best! > Raimo > photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen > > -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- > Lähettäjä: Austin Franklin <austin@darkroom.com> > Vastaanottaja: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us' > <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Päivä: 21. elokuuta 2000 19:34 > Aihe: RE: R lens tests (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Why M is so popular?) > > >>> I have quite comprehensive collection of PopPhoto tests and my reading >>> suggests quite the opposite. E.g. f.1.4/35mm lenses - the best are Leica >>> and Canon. Nikon macros are mediocre at best, Leica is the best they >>> have tested. >> >> Would it be appropriate 'fair use' for you to scan those articles on Leica >> glass tests and post them, or email them to interested parties? >> >> >