Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Hi Dominique, >What tests are you referring to? I have only seen excellent reviews, in the Swedish "Foto" and the German "Fotomagazin". BTW, I have a Skopar 25 and the Nokton 50, and IMHO they are both excellent lenses. > >Just to clearify my point: -I also think it is rational to use older Leica lenses, if I canīt afford the current aspherical versions. > >Best, >Hans > >> >> If Cosina lenses are mediocre, and the MTF-tests show poor results, it's >> irrational to put one on a leica body instead of a leica lens. >> > > > ######### Tests made by Chasseur d'images : n° 219/dec.99. The bargraph is graduated from "weak" to "excellent". I've chosen the following rating : "weak" =1; "poor"=2;"good"=3;"very good"=4;"excellent"=5. The first grade is for the center of the lens ; the second for the edge. Cosina 15 : at 4.5 :1.5;1 at 8 :3;3 (="good,good"). The optimum. My comment : not too bad for a 15. By comparison, for the elmar R 3.5/15 (in fact a Zeiss Distagon): 3;2 at full aperture and 4;3 at the optimum (5.6 and 8). Cosina 24 : at 4 : 1.5;1.5 at 8 : 3.5 ; 3. The optimum. By comparison the elmarit M 24 gives : at 4 : 4;4 (=very good, very good) at 8 : 5,4 the optimum. My comment : no need for a photo finish! Dominique