Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/11/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There is a loss of performance close up even when you correct for focus shift; the absence of a floating element is telling. Resolution drops but more importantly contrast decreases. Either the 75 Summicron or the Zeiss 100/2 Macro are much sharper inside 2 m (I have tested them) as should be any well made lens with a floating element (I just haven't critically tested any others against the 90 AA). Part of the problem is that the performance is so good at longer imaging distances. The contrast of the 90 AA is too high for my taste but if you like that it's an amazing lens. Marty On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:54 AM, John Collier <jbcollier at shaw.ca> wrote: > I can't comment on the digital/focus shift issue but my 90/2AA was tack > sharp though out the focus range. Wide open it was slightly softer in the > corners up close but only slightly and light years ahead of any other 80 > to 110 lens. > > John > > On 2010-11-07, at 1:20 PM, Tim Gray wrote: > >> I've heard the 90 AA is a wonderful lens. I've also heard that it is >> horrible below 3 m OR it loses a bit of performance in that range. >> ?Probably closer to the latter, but I'd like to hear opinions on that if >> you have any. ?How good/bad is it closer in? >> >> Which brings me to my 2nd question. I've read that the decrease in >> performance close in on this lens is due to focus shift. True? Does that >> mean there is a plane of bitingly sharp detail, but just not where you >> want it to be? > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >