Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Dominique: > >Thanks for your input on the subject. > >What has been your experience with the Focotars compared to other brands of >enlarging lenses. Your comments are most valuable. > >Thanks, >Bob Bedwell > > > ><< According to my favourite photographic review, Chasseur d'images, the > MTF-test of these 2 lenses, rodagon and apo-rodagon, gives a small > advantage to the apo in the edges. > BTW I had owned the 2 focotars, 40 and 50, and was not convinced by the > results, especially with the 40 (alone, without the focomat). > > Dominique Pellissier > >> > ######### Further comments : * focotar-2: same results as a rodagon, but without the ergonomy and the luminosity of the latter (f:4.5 against f:2.8). * focotar wa : "plastic" building and same luminosity and ergonomy as the rodagon. Results (my subjective evaluation) : so-so in the edges of the pix in comparison with a rodagon or a focotar-2. Both the lenses are still for sale as spare parts but the Leica prices are now equal to craziness. Why Leica Camera does not build a Focotar-3 "fine art" ? I enumerate the conditions : all metal building, 2.8/50mm apo, same ergonomy as a rodenstock or a schneider, price around 900 USD and a classy box with a red dot (Have you seen the boxes of the focotars ? A marketing disaster). Dominique Pellissier