Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/06/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Certain LUG members, including me, have questioned the seriousness of certain elements of lens tests. I found a quite illustrative example today. One of the best lenses in todays range of M glass is the Tele-Elmarit-M 90mm/f2,8. The french photo monthly Chasseur d'Images published in 1996 an excellent test, awarding 5 stars (their highest rating is 5 stars and they give 5 star rating to only to a few lenses). The Elmarit-R 90mm/f2,8 is optically identical to the Tele-Elmarit-M (same glass mounted in different metal). Chasseur d'Images rated this month the Elmarit-R 4 stars. If one compares the definition diagrams, the corners come out approximately the same but the center of the Elmarit-R shows clearly better definition than the center of the identical Tele-Elmarit-M. Given the extremely small tolerances under which Leica produces glass, normal production variances cannot explain these differences. It must be the testing methods used. QED. Despite obvious flaws in lens testing however, I think that lens tests are useful for those in the market for a new lens. The best aperture of both -M and -R versions was f 5,6. Gerard Captijn Geneva, Switzerland Email: captyng@vtx.ch Telephone/fax: +41 22 700 39 28