[Leica] Warm Nikkors

["Jim Licquia" <licquia@earthlink.net>]

That's odd. I've found exactly the opposite.

Some time ago I did a series of very subjective comparisions of a 90/2
Summicron R mounted on an SL and an 85/1.8 Nikkor on an F. Same subjects,
same exposure.

My conclusions were:

a) Very little to choose in terms of definition.

b) Leica rendition appeared to be a shade warmer and more 'plastic' -
probably the 'bokeh' factor.

I was going to put these comparisons up on my home pages, but decided not
to as there are plenty of people like Erwin who approach these evaluations
in a far more methodical and meaningful way.

I agree with the point about Nikkor inconsistency. There are some real dogs
out there.

However, there are also some pretty good guides to the good, the bad, and
the ugly Nikkors floating round the Net. Never had this problem with my R
lenses, which are amazingly consistent in colour rendition from 21mm ro
180mm.

Slan

Alex
=====================================================
Alex, I agree with your assessment that there is a lot of variability Nikkor
lens to lens if not sample to sample of any given lens. Of the 15 or so
Nikon lenses that I have, I would say that only 3 of them are comparable to
my Leica 35 and 50 Summicron Ms and the 90 Elmarit-M. They are the 50 1.8 AF
(very sharp and contrasty), the 24mm 2.8 AF D which is my very favorite N
lens. Very sharp at all aperatures with just a little vignetting at 2.8.
Perhaps the best lens Nikon ever made is the 180mm 2.8 AF EDIF. This lens
defies belief in its ability to record detail, -even with a 1.6 Nikon
Teleconvertor attached. I regularly send out and have 16 X 20 Cibachromes
made from Kodachrome 200 that hold their own with anything else I have seen.

My own subjective impression is that the Nikkors are, on the whole, a little
on the warm side as compared to the leica lenses. I prefer the relative
neutrality/coolness of the Leica lenses, but in certain situations I prefer
to use an SLR (N90S).

Jim Licquia, LHSA