Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/21

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Berek and the Leica Glow
From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 23:21:24 -0500

At 06:48 PM 3/21/98 -0800, Don Bledsoe wrote:
>Sorry Marc but I have to disagree.  I don't think you have described
>it at all.  The above description sounds like it could be a result of
>the scene being shot, the aperture opening hence depth of field,
>contrast of the scene, lighting, the possibility of either one of the
>lenses you tried being an abnormality, etc.  

What I was suggesting was the shooting of identical scenes with identical
lighting, identical films, identical aperture setting, and so forth.  You
will note the difference upon printing.

Insufficient research has been conducted to fully explain this effect, but
Erwin Puts has commented to me that the lens diagrams for these lenses
indicate a different location for the diaphragm, that of the Leitz Elmar
being between the first and second elements from the front, that of the CZJ
Tessar being between the second and third.  This may explain the
difference.  Erwin contends that residual aberrations of any sort would
affect in-focus and out-of-focus images, and hence his earlier post
dissenting from my understanding.  

Marc


msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!