Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Lens evaluations (was 50 summicron)
From: "Dan Honemann" <ddh@home.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 07:39:07 -0500

> I have not had my 35mm f2 ASPH very long but I have
> had the 50mm f2 through a few rolls.   My first
> impression is the same as yours, that is, the 35 ASPH
> is a cut above in sharpness.  I am still working the
> 90 ASPH and cannot comment yet on that one.

One thing I have learned in just six months of reading the LUG is that for
every post you find claiming lens x is better than lens y, you find another
one just as vehement that lens y is better than lens x.  Of course "better"
is as loose a term as "sharper" and highly subjective.

There _does_ seem to be one consistent pattern, however: those who favor the
(newer) asph lenses vs/ those who prefer the (older) spherical computations.
In the one camp, the lenses held in highest esteem are the asph's 24, 35 and
90; in the other, the lenses most praised are the 75/1.4, the three 50's,
and the 28 elmarit.

The extremists?  Those who are waiting for the 28 asph and hoping for a 50
asph summilux on the one side (let's call these the leftists), and those who
hunt down the seven element, pre-asph 35 summicron on the other (the hard
core conservatives; you know who you are!).  The lenses of choice in the
middle seem to be the 35/2 asph, the 50/2, and the 90 elmarit.

The conservatives talk a lot about tonality and bokeh, tend to shoot with
older bodies (M6 classic over TTL, M2 or M3 more than M6), and prefer b&w
print film--typically Tri-X.  They sigh a lot and lament the current trends
toward asph lenses and digital this-and-that.  The leftists' definition of
"better" usually revolves around resolution and contrast--and they're more
apt to shoot transparencies and study the corners under a loupe.  For them,
every new lens design in a cause for celebration.  They favor the Hexar RF
over the M6 and the R8 over the 6.2 (or AF SLRs over the R's altogether).

Those in the middle complain a lot about all this talk of lens x being
better than lens y and beg those who waste their time in such discussions to
spend more time actually using the equipment they've got.  They usually
shoot with a .72x M6TTL and whatever lens happens to be on hand.

Okay, now that I've made these sweeping generalizations, which category do
YOU fit in?  :)

Dan (conservative at heart, but often seduced by leftist propaganda)

Replies: Reply from D Khong <dkhong@pacific.net.sg> (Re: [Leica] lens sample variations)
Reply from Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net> (Re: [Leica] lens sample variations)
Reply from Jim Brick <jim@brick.org> ([Leica] Re: lens sample variations)
Reply from "Richard W. Hemingway" <rheming@attglobal.net> (Re: [Leica] lens sample variations)
Reply from "Richard W. Hemingway" <rheming@attglobal.net> (Re: [Leica] lens sample variations)
Reply from "William Harting" <wharting@adelphia.net> (Re: [Leica] Lens evaluations (was 50 summicron))