Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alf, Thanks for the info. One possible explanation for unsharpness at infinity might be the lens design itself favorizing close distance performance. I don't know, but do these lenses have CRC? I used the 28/2,8 AIS Nikkor extensively and found it to be very good, short of the corners when open. Another reason for your results might be sample variations - or should one call it just product quality fluctuations - affecting the lenses you had? Thanks again, Milos >Milos, > >the judgement on the different M and R lenses show my impression, >resulting from my experiences. It's nothing official, and it's no >test result. Others may have other experiences. > >Both 2.8/28 (M and R), that I had, were very sharp till a distance >of 10 meters approximately, but disappointing behind that distance, >my M lens more than my R (and in comparsion to my M SA also, which >showed a more fine grey tone rendition additionally). > >I see the effect of unsharpness at infiniy in the current 1.4/35 asph >Summilux also, despite it's extreme sharpness at closer distances. >In my impression, both pre-asph 2/35 M Summicrons are more sharp at >infinity than the current 1.4/35 asph M lens. > >Compared to the corresponding Nikkors, the 35 mm M lenses are classes >better, while the 28 mm Nikkor is rather close to the M counterpart. >Again it's my impression, others may have different experiences. > >Alf > >------------------------------------------------ >At 00:19 15.12.1997 +0100, you wrote: >>I am particularly interested in the 2,8/28, my favorite focal length. I was >>almost decided to trade all my Nikon plastic gear for a M6 with this lens - >>should I have second thoughts now? Also, I've heard in the past that some M >>lenses have the same design as their R counterparts - this would explain >>why the M 28 is so bulky compared to the 35/2 - even if it's a stop slower. >>Yet, the protruding back element would suggest that it is not a retrofocus >>lens after all. Milos Kocman phone +4202 / 62 77 666 Lucemburska 4 mobile +420 / 602 255 321 130 00 Prague 3 fax +4202 / 27 20 47 Czech Republic e-mail milos@bohem-net.cz