Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 07:56 PM 25-10-97 +0200, you wrote:
>At 08:54 25.10.1997 -0400, Dan wrote:
>
>>, but my summilux definitely outperforms the Planar at 2.8.
>>And I DO occasionally use the lens at f2.
>
>Can you give some more details on "outperforms", please? The comparison to
>the 2.8/80 Planar is certainly a stupid idea ... it just came to my mind,
>because the focus (in mm) is similar.
>
>Alf
>
I've never done side by side comparisons, But I find the Planar lens at 2.8
to be a bit soft, and suffers quite a bit from light fall-off. I make it a
point to never use the lens at 2.8. The out of focus areas of the
Summilux ("Bokeh") appear more pleasent as well.
On the other hand, maybe it is my lens. The most recent issue I have of
Hasselblad's Forum magazine shows some pictures taken of Hale Bopp Comet
with an 80/2.8 Planar on a tripod mounted clock driven Hasselblad, wide
open at f2.8 (so the caption states). The picture looks amazingly sharp.
Go figure!
Dan C.