Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>TM wrote: > ><<<Have any LUG members conducted tests to compare the quality of output >>from Leica's apochromatic lenses with standard lenses of the same focal >lengths, with or without an extender? IOW, have any of you been able to >definitely confirm a distinct improvement in color rendition and/or >sharpness when using the APOs?>>>>> > Shoot some pictures with an 80, 90, 135, and then shoot the same pictures with the 100 APO. After you pick your jaw up off the floor, you'll have your answer. But just because a lens is razor sharp and has exquisite color correction and rendition, doesn't always make it the best lens for the job. You don't shoot portraits with the 100 APO unless you wish to make enemies. Sometimes that radiant Leica look with smooth Bokeh is best. I sold my 90/2 and 135/2.8 when I bought my 100/2.8 APO. Bad move. One of these days I'm going to buy a good used 80 and a 135. The 135/2.8 R lens was one of my first Leica lenses. In 1976 I bought an R3, 35/2.0, 60/2.8, and 135/2.8 . The 135 lens was one of my favorites and it really performed with an extender (no, I didn't get an extender in 76.) Turned it into a very sharp close focussing lens. I miss it. Jim