[Leica] CDI tests

[Alex Brattell <alex@zetetic.co.uk>]

>>>Frank Dernie quoted CDI magazine:

>Lenses rated as particularly good wide open included the EOS 135 f2, Contax
>G 45 f2 (but not the 35), Konika M Hexanon 50 f2, Leica 35 f2 asph, 50 f2
>(M & R), Nikon Noct Nikor 58 f1.2, Pentax 85 f1.4 (best of the lot).
>Additional lenses mentioned as particularly good in low light from previous
>testswere Canon 35 f1.4, 50 f1, 85 f1.2, 300 f4 IS, Leica 35 f1.4 asph, 90
>f2 (Noctilux does badly!!), Apo Elmarit R 180 f2.8, pentax 43 f1.9
>>>>>

Don't get this, and I bet Noctilux users are similarly bemused.
I've used a Pentax(A*) 85mm 1.4 extensively for years (used it yesterday on
a small studio job). All conditions, all apertures. It never occurred to me
to test it, but I most definitely prefer the quality of my Leica M lenses
(all recent) when used wide open. Better eyelashes, better blurs, better
skin, nicer depth of field effects, better contrast, better colours. The
Pentax is a great lens, an old friend and lovely to use (on a Pentax LX),
very good handling. 
I was under the clear impression I'd invested in the quality of my images by
using Leica.
I see it every time I use them (except when the pictures are crap of course!).

Tests? So confusing!
Can the map fit the territory?
This has been a fully subjective, jargon free transmission. Not in a
scientific mood today (is that a contradiction in terms?) so I'll go and see
Toy Story 2, digital recording, digital projection. Spooky.

Alex





____________________________________________

                         alex@zetetic.co.uk
    http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~abrattell/

___________________________________________