RE: [Leica] Build Quality of Lenses

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

But the optical performance of the newest lenses IS vastly superior - that's
just the point.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Doug Cooper
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 10:38 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Cc: leica-users-digest@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Build Quality of Lenses
>
>
>
> Okay, I've now spent a couple of days with a DR Summicron (thanks to
> Ting!), and I have a few thoughts.  While I've never been impressed by the
> argument that holds the M3, M2 and M4 to be superior mechanically to the
> later bodies -- I've worked with both types, and my M4-P is just as nice,
> in every way -- I am now utterly convinced of the the superior build
> quality of the early lenses.  Later, horrendously expensive Leica lenses,
> though reasonably well-constructed, feel about as solid as my old Zuikos,
> and less solid than the fully metal lenses for the Contax SLR.  Frankly,
> the new black Voigtlanders feel better (although I'm less happy with the
> finish on the chrome versions).
>
> This DR Summicron, on the other hand, is about as well made as
> anything I've ever held in my hands.  It's a joy.  I'm determined, now, to
> buy only the earlier lenses, unless the optical performance of the
> recent versions are vastly superior.  Call it a fetish thing.
>
> So.  I'm still searching for that perfect 35mm lens.  How is that old
> chrome Summicron, relative to the fourth generation?  And what about the
> 35/2.8 Summaron?
>
>
> Doug Cooper
>
> (oh, and thanks for the response re:  my IIIc.)
>
>
>
>