Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 8:46 AM +0100 12/22/00, Robert Appleby wrote:
>Just back from a few days at Brian Stevens' place in London, where I also
>met up with John Brownlow to discuss our plans to achieve universal
>domination. Unfortunately we've had to reschedule our assumption of power
>by a couple of months, but despite this disappointment we had a nice time
>wondering in the gloom of London. Brian has just recently bought a 50
>summicron, as I did also a couple of months ago, and we were both noting
>how disappointed we are with the results. There's a definite feel/look to
>the new 35 asphs which leaves the 50/2 for dead. Brian uses the 35/2 and I
>use the 35/1.4. If I have understood Erwin's comments on the 50/2, it has
>excellent resolution etc but my feeling is that the newer lenses have a
>much greater _perceived_ sharpness. Put slides from the 50 next to the
>35/1.4 or 24/2.8 asphs and they really look soft and wishywashy. Well,
>that's what I felt, anyway, does anyone have the same/conflicting feelings?
>Meanwhile, Happy Christmas and so on.
>Rob.
>Robert Appleby
>'we had a nice time
wondering in the gloom of London.'
no 'wonder' world domination is going nowhere. ;-)
As for the Summicron 50 question, I have to agree. The smoothness and
slightly undercorrected spherical aberrations of the 50 leave it with
a creamy tonality that at times makes its images seem less crisp than
those of the newer lenses. The 35/1.4 and 90 ASPH certainly have a
clarity that makes the 50 Summi look a bit older, if not less sharp.
- --
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com