Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/03

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

Subject: [Leica] LHSA convention cluster bombs Part One The Beginning.
From: Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie)
Date: Wed Nov 3 22:30:04 2004
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20041103215613.04641b80@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>

Hi William,
I do think it is fair to say that APO tells you how sharp a lens is and 
is an absolute statement of quality. It does not give a clue as to 
whether you will like the boke. You need the actual MTF curves to 
evaluate the boke (My limited experience convinces me that the 
explanation in the "Lens Work" book is the first I have seen to be 
right in every case on boke).
Asph on the other hand tells you nothing. Most lenses made today are 
"asph" including many spectacles and pretty well all P&S and digicam 
lenses. Leica use asph lenses for the same reason as others, to get the 
quality at a lower price due to fewer lens elements. When asph elements 
were hand ground they were extremely expensive. Ground asph lenses 
still are very expensive but hot pressed ones, as used by Leica and 
others, are no longer prohibitive.
Frank

On 4 Nov, 2004, at 03:12, William G. Lamb, III wrote:

>
> Dan,
>
> Sorry, twelve-hour day in the office today and am just getting to my 
> mail...
>
> "Bokeh" is one thing, "brittleness" is another. I'm not saying that APO
> correction generally means that some images in harsh side-light will
> be brittle. I'm observing that LEICA  lenses in the 90mm - 100mm range
> appear to have this tendency, whatever their reasons may be, the 90 APO
> ASPH in particular.
>
> Since 2000, the direction Leica has been going in lens design as 
> exhibited
> by the 28 ASPH is a GOOD THING in my view. The results aren't harsh
> and the corrections produce images in contrasty light which would have
> been almost impossible a few years prior. As I said earlier, I have 
> ordered
> a 50 ASPH in the hope that this trend in lens design continues. I'm 
> just
> suspicious of the APO correction Leica did in the past and won't buy a
> lens on blind faith with this designation until I've seen many 
> examples of
> its output. Trust this clarifies...
>
> William
>
> At 08:06 AM 11/03/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>> I've missed something here.   I can understand why someone might not 
>> like
>> the ASPH correction in a lens;  I *think* it is residual spherical
>> aberation which is the basis for lovely "bokeh" which people get soft 
>> and
>> fuzzy over (or conversely might be the cause of "brittleness"), and 
>> which
>> is highly corrected in aspherical designs.    APO design merely 
>> reduces
>> chromatic aberation, which I can't see having an unintended 
>> detrimental
>> effect on a len's performance.
>>
>> -dan c.
>>
>>  At 07:48 AM 03-11-04 -0500, William G. Lamb, III wrote:
>> >
>> [snip]
>> >
>> >So let's not get too wound up here, O.K.? I would LOVE to fill that 
>> 75mm
>> >frame on two of my M's. If it's an ASPH, that could be very good. If 
>> it's
>> >got APO correction, I'll be more inclined to wait and see some 
>> results
>> >before springing for one. That's all...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] LHSA convention cluster bombs Part One The Beginning.)
In reply to: Message from lambroving at worldnet.att.net (William G. Lamb, III) ([Leica] LHSA convention cluster bombs Part One The Beginning.)