Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marc: I'll bow to your experience on this one. I've never owned, but have tried two examples of this lens was was very dissappointed by the result when compared to the Super-Angulon. Given the QC you mention it is likely I tried poorer examples. kw > >I'm really not certain I'd agree with this, as it depends what optical >characteristic you're analyzing. The Russar is a Topogon clone, and as such >suffers from the slow speed inherent in that design. But it is a bit >sharper, has less distortion, and less edge fade-out than the Super-Angulon >design. The Topogon is a superlative design and, for all its slowness, is >quite competitive today. Of course, Russian quality control is sloppy, >sloppy, sloppy, and some of these lenses are undoubtedly dogs. But the most >of them seem quite sound performers and certainly most of those who use them >seem content with their qualities. > >Marc > > >msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 >Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir! ---- Ken Wilcox Carolyn's Personal Touch Portraits Davison Middle School preferred---> <wilcox@umcc.umich.edu> 600 Dayton, Davison, MI 48423 <kwilcox@genesee.freenet.org>