Re: 35mm Asph./ASPHERICAL

["Hubert Nowotny" <hubertn@mail.ctr.co.at>]

Eric,
Roger,
Friends,

First, the terms "better" and "worse" will only be meaningful if the 
criteria used are given. My goal is the top quality picture (a 
balanced mixture of sharpness, color, color thuth, liveliness, 
brightness etc.). many people rank e.g. ease of use as a criterion 
for "good equipment".

Then, the quotation marks I used around the words "you needed to know 
someone at Leica" should indicate in short that the sentence wasn't 
meant to be put on the scales. Certainly there were other ways to get 
the lens! (In this country: irony in _italics_! - Kurt Tucholsky, 
German writer in first third of this century. Well, I used quotation 
marks ... ; - )  ) And you'll be able to get it second hand.

Then, to come to the point: Testing high end equipment leaves the 
range of measurable data. Wer'e talking about top quality equipment 
(and it wouldn't be top quality/high end/call it as you like if you could
 _measure_ a flaw!). It's the same case for high end hifi equipment 
BTW, all units will deliver excellent test results.

I've studied the BAS tests for several M lenses (in between which I 
could discover remarkable differences in contrast etc.) and they all 
performed excellent in the lab test figures ...

When I compare two lenses I walk around and look for a good, suitable 
motive to shoot. Something out of the real world, not a test chart. 
Then I use my favourite slide film for the conditions in which the 
lenses are of interest (e.g. Kodak EPR for daylight) and carefully 
shoot the situation with both lenses (same film, same camera, 
exposure bracketing for both, ...). Sometimes I shoot the same 
situation using known equipment (another lens which I use as a 
reference). This procedure is repeated with several (different) 
situations. (Under normal conditions a tripod is not really needed; 
ithere's not too much use in applying a tripod in a test situatuion when 
I wouldn't use it for real shooting). But you're quite right that 
such a device should be used ... (Such a lazy guy as I am!)

Then, the film/s is/are developed carefully (as all the others) and 
the slides are put o the light desk (somewhere at 5000 K, certainly) 
and compared using a magnifying glass.

I've gone through this procedure for many times. It was used by a 
close friend of mine to compare the Summilux M 35 Asph. and 
ASPHERICAL. The differences were clearly to be seen, especially in 
terms of colors (differentiation, liveliness, ...). As I have already 
had _several_ lengthy discussions about lenses in general and in 
detail with this particular guy, I do trust his description - and I
was really happy for not having to perform the lengthy procedure this time 
(comparing the Asph. and the ASPHERICAL). For me the case is clear.

But, whenever I'll get hold of an Asph. - well, OK, I'll compare the 
two by my own and I'll tell you about the details. I could also send 
slides - if you want ...  (But it will take some time until the 
procedure will take place; unfortunately "I've got other hobies too" 
- - means I've got a job and it eats away much of my time. And I'll 
have to wait for an Asph. to test.)

J.W. Goethe (probably the most famous German writer) says "it's easy 
to believe what the crowd believes". (I'm used to be part of a 
minority as I'm used not to believe too much in brochures ...)

Have a fine day
and enjoy your life
Greetings
Hubert


* Von/From: HUBERT NOWOTNY, CTR Hatzenberger & Nowotny OEG
* A-1040 Wien/Vienna, Kettenbrueckengasse 16 (Austria, Europe ...)
* Tel ++43-1- 586 20 22 - 0, Fax ++43-1- 586 20 22 - 24
* hubertn@ctr.co.at, http://www.ctr.co.at/ctr/