[Leica] R lens comparison

[grduprey at mchsi.com (grduprey@mchsi.com)]

While I don't own the 24 Asph M, I have used it, and I own the 24 R lens.  
It may not be quite as sharp and definitely not as new a design, but it is a 
top performer.  I have gotten excellent results from thisold design lens.

gene

-------------- Original message from Tom Schofield 
<tomschofield@comcast.net>: -------------- 


> I'd have to say the current 19mm R is comparable to my 21mm M Asph, 
> and the 28mm R is the equal of the 28mm M 2.8, for all practical 
> purposes. The 50mm Summicrons are equivalent, and the 50mm 
> Summiluxes are, for practical purposes, equal; the 75 and 80mm 
> Summiluxes are fairly equal, the 60mm is stellar in macro or normal 
> ranges. Overall, I'd say the systems are of roughly equal quality, 
> although you can nit-pick particular focal lengths and lenses, such 
> as the 24mm R, which, while competent, is not reputed to be anywhere 
> near the M Asph (I personally have not used either). I love them 
> both for different reasons. One for precision, the other for 
> stealth. You can't frame a 21mm M anywhere near as precisely as you 
> can a 19mm R, for example, but you can't stick the latter in your 
> pocket! 
> 
> People go on about R lenses being retrofocus designs, but they don't 
> realize so are the M lenses ever since they had to design in enough 
> rear-clearance for the swinging meter-cell of the M-5 and to avoid 
> blocking the view of the meter cell on the bottom of the M6! Not as 
> much clearance is necessary as for the mirror of the R cameras, but 
> they are still not truly symmetrical designs since the Super- 
> Angulons. It's not true that you can't design as good of a lens with 
> a long back focus, it just adds complexity and size, as I understand 
> it. Compare the size of the 21mm ASPH with the size of the 21mm 
> SA's . Retrofocus even has some advantages, such as less 
> vignetting. You can't generalize--look at the results of the final 
> products. 
> 
> Tom 
> 
> 
> On Sep 23, 2007, at 11:55 PM, Christopher Birchenhall wrote: 
> 
> > Jack 
> > 
> > In my own view the better shorter focal length rangefinder lens (up to 
> > 75mm) outperform the comparable R lenses. Having said that you will 
> > find the 35 f2 and 50mm f2 R lenses are good enough for most work; I 
> > believe the latest 50 f1.4 R is very good only surpassed by the latest 
> > 50 f1.4 M ASPH. The 90mms (Elmarit f2.8 and f2 Apos) are very similar. 
> > The 135mm f3.4 Apo M is said be very good without a direct counterpart 
> > in the R range. Apart from that the R range's real strength is in the 
> > long lenses: 90 f2 Apo, the Apo-Macro 100 f2.8 Apo, the 180 Apo, the 
> > 80-200 f4 zoom. 
> > 
> > As always its horses for courses. Chris B 
> > 
> > On 24/09/2007, Jack Maddox wrote: 
> >> Hi All, 
> >> 
> >> Having never used a Leica R camera I am curious as to how the R 
> >> lenses 
> >> compare with their rangefinder counterparts. 
> >> 
> >> Jack 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Leica Users Group. 
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information 
> >> 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Leica Users Group. 
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Leica Users Group. 
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information