Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Do you have detailed reports of your testing of the Planar versus the Summicrons? I would love to see some details on what differences you actually found........ At 08:55 PM 3/9/98 +0100, you wrote: > These I >>compared side by side on the light box, under a 4x and 8x loupe. >>Practically identical.....same color saturation, same sharpness, same >>fine details.....I think if I mixed them up in the same box I could not >>tell them >>apart. >> > >This comparison might be usefull for practical shooting. It has been stated >before and I will repeat it here: A 4x and 8x loupe in combination with a >'chrome of whatever make or speed is a quite weak platform to base >conclusions upon, regarding optical performance. As a recent posting >mentioned: it is not always important to look for the ultimate or even for >noticeable differences. But not important does not mean that differences do >not exist or that quite an effort is needed to note and evalute the >differences. My own testing (granted sometimes a bit on the strict side) >shows that differences between the Planar 45 and the Summicron R and M are >only visible when enlargements exceed the 12 to 15 times. > >If I were to ride two sportscars and noticed that at 50miles both had a >good roadholding, sufficient for my driving style, can I then conclude that >in more exacting circomstances these inferences still make sense? > >Erwin > Francesco Sanfilippo, Five Senses Productions webmaster@5senses.com http://www.5senses.com/