Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]No you are not missing anything. The asph IS better at the wide apertures, and is clearly a superiour low light lens. I am just pointing out that by the middle apertures, the differences are essentially gone. Remember, the original post included "Even at f/4, 5,6 , 8 etc.. ?" Dan C. >>Do you really believe that the Asph. 35/1,4 >>(together with the former 35/1,4 Aspherical) >>is not better than the old 35/1,4 ? >>Even at f/4, 5,6 , 8 etc.. ? At 10:02 AM 08-06-98 -0400, B. D. wrote: >Am I really missing something here? If one didn't need 1.4 and 2, one could >deal with a 35 2.8. But if the new asph, is clearly better at 1.4 and at f >2, then it is unquestionably a superior low light lens to the old 35 >Summilux, which, after all, is why one would consider buying and using it.