Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/07/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Lens Comparisons
From: Alan Bearden <healey@uclink.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 17:35:22 -0700

Beamon wrote in response:
>
>Modern designs, using the calculating advantages of the computer, 
>production techniques allowing less expensive aspheric elements and the 
>latest coating formulations and application methods do allow a lens with 
>more elements in more groups to have similar or better results in the 
>criteria that we feel is important. 
>
>What boggles my mind is how good the lenses were when these means were not 
>available. I love technology, but boy, back in the good old days. . .
>--
>Roger Beamon  
>       Naturalist & Photographer
>       Leica Historical Society Of America
>       mailto:beamon@primenet.com
>          
>          Thought for the day:
>      Who needs rhetorical questions?
>
- ------------   REPLY   --------

Yes, modern computer-aided designs (and better optical glass) does permit
better lens at the maximum apertures, e.g., the 50mm Summilux F:1.4 vs.
the Summarit and the manufacture of the f:1.4 and f:2 35mm lens, but the
90mm Summicron f:2 is no better than the Elmar f:4 or f:2.8 at f:4 or f:5.6.

Thanks for your comments.

Alan Bearden