Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1995/11/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 6:28 PM 10/31/95 +0000, Fred N. Ward wrote: >I'd like to hear more from anyone with serious comparisons to make regarding >the 28 and 40mm Minolta CLE lenses. I still have mine, as well as the >Leitz 40mm lens on a CL, and I never thought the 28mm lens was all that >contrasty. I used to think the 90mm Leitz lenses for M cameras were the most >contrasty I ever owned. I thought the CLE was a steal... a genuine bargain. >Lots of features, great size, compatable with Leitz lenses, etc..... and >mine never game me a day of trouble. If you like contrasty lens and take color photos, Minolta 28/2.8 may suits you very much. In my B/W case, it is so contrasty that if I print to reveal the shadow details, high-light is kind of washed out no matter how I adjust film development and exposure. Hi-light detail is vice versa. Combination with TMAX400 was the worst. Leica lenses are normally low contrast compared with Nikon/Canon and have beautiful tone rendering especially for shadow details and that what I like. I struggled with Minolta 28/2.8 for almost 4 years and gave up. It was so different from Leica in terms of tone rendering. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Hisashi Naganuma NEC Technologies, Inc. Mountain View, CA hisashi@lpd.sj.nec.com _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/