Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]All Leica lenses were rated as "Super", which means very, very good. There are no bad Leica lenses, but still, some were a little more "Super" than others. But this is not so interesting, as we all knew that before. My point was that the Voigtlander Bessa lenses got very high ratings. The Voigtlander Bessa R and lenses seems to be an alternative to be taken very seriously. That is all I wanted to say, and the reason why I posted all the numbers. I think Cosina will sell a lot of lenses and M-adapters... Hans > But what do those numbers mean? If one lens gets a 9.8 and another a 9.2, > is the 9.2 lens a real stinker? What if it was 9.7, or 9.6? What > numerical differences are distinguishable to the naked eye? And what > about thinks like 'bokeh'? Does the 9.8 lens automatically have better > bokeh than the 9.2 lens? Or light fall off? etc. etc. > > When I saw that list of scores, all I seem to remember is a whole bunch of > 9 point somethings. Were there any bad lenses listed there? > > Dan C.