[Leica] Hexar RF tests

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

The BJP notes that the quality of all three Hexar lenses is superb. 
The reviewer also notes that the rangefinder base of the RF is more 
than sufficient for the 135mm lens. The comparison pictures of the 
90mm L and K are of an embarrassing simplicity.
The report by Reponses Photo is more interesting. The 28mm lens is at 
full aperture: average and improves till f/8. The 50 is considered 
equal to the Summicron and the 90 is on a draw with the Elmarit, with 
a whisker's advantage to the Leica lens. The Hexanon 90 is considered 
as good at full aperture and stopped down. Chasseurs d'Image gives 4 
stars (performance) to the Elmarit 28 and 4 stars to the Hexanon. It 
is the one to choose from the three Konica lenses, CdI notes. The bar 
graphs show a better performance for the Leica lens at full aperture, 
but slightly so: average for the Konica and between average and good 
for the Leica.
The 50mm Konica gets 4 stars and the Leica lens 5 stars. CdI notes 
that the Leica lens is still the reference lens, mainly because of 
its performance wide open. The Konica lens gets a 'good' 
qualification for centre performance as does the Leica lens. Only the 
center performance differs; almost good for Leica and average for 
Konica. The 90mm Hexanon (5 elements) is called a clone of the Leica 
version (4 elements), which is not true: it is a clone of the Contax 
G series (5 elements). Konica gets 4 stars as does the Sonnar for the 
Contax. The Leica 90 gets 5 stars. The Konica is evaluated as very 
good, but performance improves when stopping down. The Leica lens 
gets an excellent note. If you look at the graphs itself the 
differences are within very small limits. According to the graphs the 
Contax 90mm is above the Hexanon and a fraction below the leica 
version. The Contax lens BTW was nominated the best 90mm ever by 
PopPhoto.
Reponses Photo in its evaluation of the body is more on balance 
noting that the (dis)advantages of the Konica and the (dis)advantages 
of the Leica cancel out and that the user should carefully reflect on 
his/her priorities before choosing. CdI is more in favour of the 
Konica and can hardly conceal its feeling that the Konica kicked the 
Leica in the back.
What we can tell from these reports at the moment is this: the 
optical evaluation leaves much to be desired. The reports are 
contradictory, mainly because none of the three reports gives any 
detailed info about the differences. It is a pity that they did not 
refer to the MTF Graphs which are available from Konica, Leica and 
Zeiss. Much confusion could have been avoided.
On the body and the system as such. More reflection and consideration 
is required. All three magazines were in a hurry to present first 
impression reports and none of them went indepth. The RF finder is 
not tested with the 75/1,4 or the 1.4/50 or 1/50 or 135mm. not even 
the 90mm accuracy is tested. CdI makes a passing remark that 90 is 
the limit for Rangefinding, but no proof. The accuracy of the AE is 
not tested. The lenses are not tested and compared according to a 
decent test program.
I will get the Hexar and lenses in a week. Expect a report not before 
end of january. The Hexar deserves a close study. I find it a pity 
that all reports to date focus on features and none on the camera as 
an instrument to accomplish a certain goal.

Erwin