Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B. D. Colen wrote: > Horst - I have no idea whether his tests are any good or not....But has it > not occured to you that in terms of what appears to be possible now in > optical design, that a lens like this is, indeed, at the limits of possible > optical perfection. B.D.,30 years ago, we would have said the same thing. But look at the advances since. I believe they will still go on. Maybe with non glass lenses, electronic lenses or whatever, but something new and better will arrive sooner or later. > ...I know it's not a Leica lens. And I know it's not a > German lens, but it certainly seems possible to me that it good be as good > as it gets for a lens of this type. You may be right, with your comment about the Leica lens, but the German part is not correct. I don't care, in what country anything is made. Look, in my , what's left of it, camera equipment collection, there Is Leica equipment < of course >, Voigtlander > the real one <Cannon and Pentax. Tell me in what other countries are lenses made. This days, that is. > .....And, as to his mistake with the > Leica comparison, presumably he was comparing it to the wides lens Leica has > or does make? > Well he did not state this. Which one of the wider lenses did he have in mind. However it does not make much sense to compare such an extreme wide-angle lens, with a , in relation to it,much lesser angle lens. you might as well compare the a 24mm lens with a 35mm lens. > Oh, as to the Leica lenses of the 50s.....If we were to put them on a modern > 1-20 scale, it seems to me we'd be talking maybe 5/20....not 10.....;-) You are right, of course, but in the 50s, they would surely have been rated at 18 to 20. and every one though they are just about the ultimate in optical quality. Today's equivalent lenses would then be 30 or 35/20. Regards, Horst Schmidt