Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/25

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

Subject: Re: 50 nlux Vs 75 slux
From: Alfred Breull <puma@hannover.sgh-net.de>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:57:00 +0200

Dan and Will: Thanks to both of you for the information!
Alf
- ----------------------------------------------------------------

At 10:58 25.10.1997 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 97-10-25 09:56:13 EDT, you write:
>
><< >May I ask: If you don't use that lens at f 1.4 and seldom at f 2.0, where
>is
> >the advantage compared e.g. to the 2.8/80 Planar? I mean, e.g. a twin-eye
> >Rollei would have been less expensive.
>
>Dan Cardish replied:
> 
> I own a Hasselblad with a 80/2.8 Planar.  I'm not sure if there is any
> similarity between this lens and the one on the Rollie, but my summilux
> definitely outperforms the Planar at 2.8.  And I DO occasionally use the
> lens at f2. >>
>
>I have test shot the 1.4 75mm Summilux and also own a 2.8 Planar CF, and must
>agree with Dan. The Summilux is superior at f2.8, still excellent at f2.0,
>and usable when properly focused (ref. our old discussion on DOF versus M
>rangefinder accuracy) at f1.4. I found the lens to be equivalent to the 90
>Summicron at similar apertures, but not as sharp as the current 90mm
>Elmarit-M throughout the range. Of course, it blows the doors off the Elmarit
>at f2.0 and 1.4...
>
>(I ended up buying the Elmarit-M and have been absolutely delighted with it)
>
>Will von Dauster
>