Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ray, It is impossible to evaluate test results unless you know the criteria used. On the face of it, rating the 50mm higher than the 35mm seems insane. I have both of these lenses. The 35mm is clearly better than the 50mm in terms of sharpness, detail, flare suppresion. This is not to say that the 50mm is bad, it is outstanding, but the 35mm is even more outstanding. If Photodo gets an opposite result, then I can only conclude that either their methodology is flawed or someone made a mistake reporting the results. Nathan Ray Moth wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm not a great fan of lens testing but I like to have a quick look at > test results before I buy a lens, just in case! I was quite surprised > to see that Photodo - link > http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/leicam.shtml#LeicaM - rates the 35mm > Summilux ASPH as the worst M lens they have ever tested, with an > overall rating of only 3.8. In contrast, the 50mm Summilux-M, which I > know is quite an old design, is rated at 4.2. It was my impression, > from reading the archive, that the 35mm Summilux ASPH was considered by > most people to be a star lens. So, is Photodo off the mark here or is > the 50mm Summilux really all that much better than the 35mm? > > Regards, > > ===== > Ray > > "The trouble with resisting temptation is > you never know when you'll get another chance!" > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. > http://personals.yahoo.com > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- Nathan Wajsman Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw.htm General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html