[Leica] Test report that ends all reports?

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

The report to end all reports

Believe it or not: I could use a new 2/90 APO/ASPH for some time and
here my full report. LUGgers are lucky! A world exclusive many months
before the official delivery.

At full aperture (2.0) we find a high contrast image with extremely fine
detail rendered with good clarity and contrast. On axis (center) and in
the field (outer zones) and extending to the very corners the minutest
detail possible is recordable. The faintest trace of softness at the
edges of very fine detail can be detected. Outlines of image details are
of suberb edge contrast. At f/2,8 the contrast improves a bit and the
whole inage crispens somewhat, bringing in the finest details above the
threshold of visibility. Stopping down after 2,8 only improves depth of
field. This more than outstanding behaviour holds till f/22. At f/4,0 we
find an incredible capacity for recording the finest possible detail
with the crystal clear clarity and excellent microcontrast that is the
hallmark of the New Design Principles by Mr. Kolsch. Perfect centering,
only the faintest trace of astigmatism and no curvature of field added
by meticulous engineering make this lens the One To Use.

But hold on!

The current champion is the APO-Macro-Elmarit 2.8/100. Centering and
curvature of field are perfect. But in the outermost corners we can
detect a softness of details not found with the SAA 2/90. At full
aperture (2,8) the image is of very high contrast, exhibiting no flare
tendencies. The finest possible details are very crisply rendered on
axis and over the whole field, excluding the corners. At f/4,o the faint
trace of astigmatism is gone and now we have image recording
capabilities of the highest possible calibre. Stopping down to f/8 gives
no further improvement,but after this the edges soften a little.

The Elmarit-M has at full aperture (2,8) image recording capabilities
almost the equal of the SAA and the AME on axis. In the field the
extremely fine details are very well rendered with a slight softness of
the edges. And the crisp clarity of outlines is a bit behind the SAA and
the AME. AT f/4,0 the microcontrast improves and now approaches the
image quality of the other two. At f/5,6 the EM is on a level with the
others at 2.8 to 3.5.

THE BIG QUESTION? These three lenses are among the best Leica has to
offer. The EM is a bit behind the other two. Given its performance
level, we need the highest possible expertise to approach the limits of
the other two. The SAA and the AME are in my opinion equal, but show a
subtly different fingerprint. The SAA excels at image clarity of
extremely fine details where the AME excels at the crisp rendering of
the same details. For me the SAA is the winner, because it offers its
superb image qualities at f/2.0 Gone are the days that one has to excuse
the quality on the grounds that full aperture is just that: full
aperture. The SAA is one of the very few to offer stunning quality at
f/2,0.

Add on to the 3,4/135. After my report there was a question about the
2,8/135. I tested one recently and I have some bad news. AT full
aperture the center has good contrast and very fine detail is crsiply
rendered with adequate clarity. In the field the imge quality drops
visibly and now fine detail is recorded with good contrast. Very fine
detail is washed out by softness of edges and low contrast. Stopping
down improves somewhat. Generally this lens is miles behind the 3,4/135.

ANOTHER BIG QUESTION? What about the 1.4/80 and 1,4/75 compared to the
90/100. I told you: This report gives you all answers. The 1,4/80 at
full aperture gives a lower contrast image with a tendency to flare.
FIne detail is recorded with good contrast but soft edges. This
recording capacility holds on axis and only slightly drops in the field.
Extremely fine details are just visible, but it depends on the film if
you can see them. At f/2,0 very fine details visibly crispen but the
edges stay on the soft side.
At 2.8 the image quality improves but is not on the same level as the
2,8 capabilities of the 90/100 trio.
AT f/4,0 we find the quality we alredy noted in the SAA at full aperure.
Stopping down improves the contrast and the recording of extremely fine detail.
The edges of outlines stay a bit soft.

The Summilux-M 1,4/75 at full aperture is better than the 1,4/80 at full
aperture.
Higher contrast give the extremely fine detail more clarity and sharper edges.
Astigmatism is visible which softens the finest possible texture details.
At f/2,0 the image improves a lot and at f/2,8 is outstanding if not superb.
Here we see a stop advantage compared with the 1,4/80.
Stopping down brings in the extremely fine detail recording with clarity and
high edge contrast.

Overall the M 1.4/75 is a bit ahead of the R 1,4/80. It is questionable if one
can see it it in everyday picture shooting. The comaprison with the 2,8/135
is a point.
This lens is often praised for its image quality. In comparison to the 6
lenses
evaluated here, there is not even the idea of a contest. It might hold its own
when used at optimum aperture with the full aperture of the 1,4 lenses. No
contest
to be honest.

This raises a new big question. Another one? Yes!
How to make sure we can exploit the awsome capablities of modern Leica lenses.

I made some remarks about this topic in my postings. Time for a bit more
reflection. I will keep you informed. But Kodachrome is part of the answer!

Erwin