Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 98-01-21 03:06:57 EST, Patrick writes >> snip << In any case, given that lots of people on this list report experiences different than yours with the 50/2 Summicron, does it seem possible to you that your particular example of this lens may not be typical? Perhaps it needs an internal cleaning and should be collimated to your camera. I ask purely as a matter of curiosity -- -Patrick << ======================================================== Just as a matter of curiosity -- since I had about a dozen 50/2 Summicrons in my posssession at that time -- I ran a comparison test against my Alien LTM Nikkor 50/1.4 & Canon 50/1.4. These lenses were by no means new but all were what I considered to be in typical EX to MT- condition. They results were not really surprising to me, as there were more difference between two identical Summicrons then there were between the Aliens & the Leitz lenses. These were not elaborate bench tests but were just the type of pictures that I would take normally. On closer inspection of these lenses later with a flash light & collimator, I could definitely tell why there was a difference - only 7 of these used Summicrons were adjusted to be sharp at infinity and I didnt use the camera to determine this but used an infinity focus jig. Three of them had a misty appearance caused by some oil on the iris blades. In conclusion I feel that regardless of these finding - all of these lenses gave excellent results although the worst and the best were identical collapsibles. Marvin Moss