RE: [Leica] summicron dr

["Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>]

FWIW Mounting the 'normal' summicron 50/2 on the Viso/Bellows II does a much
better job of close focussing than other 50mm lenses I've tried (actually
usable :-!). It would appear than when the lens was designed at least some
effort to flatten the field was made.

Jonathan Borden
A.H.SCHMIDT wrote:
>
>
>
> Guy Bennett wrote:
>
> > lugfolk,
> >
> > what's the skinny on the summicron dr? is it just that if focuses closer
> > than the non-dr summicrons? (and if so, what's the big deal?) does it do
> > any other tricks?
> >
> > at this point, it's just curiosity, but in the past, curiosity has
> > inevitably lead to the excessive spending of money, and as w.
> blake wrote,
> > 'the road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.'
> >
> > guy
>
>   Guy, It also brews coffee. Actually I don't quite understand
> your question,
> when you say "what's the big deal?".
>
> The big deal is: A near focusing lens focuses near, contrary to a non near
> focussing lens which doesn't.
>
> The secret is: If you want to focus closer to an object, you use a close
> focusing lens, if you don't, then you don't need to use a close
> focusing lens.
>
> The reason it is (was) more expensive than its normal counter part, are "
>
> 1.) The focussing mechanism on the lens barrel is more complicated
> 2.) It uses a set of clip on extra eyes when using close focus.
> This of course
> also costs money to produce.
> I own a DR Summicron. Quite a few times, the close focussing
> facility helped
> me getting the picture I wanted. I just wish there was an even closer
> focussing lens for the M's (not the Visioflex) available. However
> I suppose
> the parallax correction would be to complicated to do this.
>
> I find this lens most useful. The quality is also very good.
>
> Regards, Horst schmidt
>
>
>