Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Could they be experiencing sample variation? Tom S. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christer Almqvist" <christer@almqvist.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 11:16 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] Not Leica quality > > On Thursday I bought a 15mm Heliar. On Friday, I shot photos > >with it, developed the film and printed (via Photoshop) the results. > >On Saturday, I returned the lens and got a refund. > > Sharpness/resolution was pretty good in the center, contrast was > >OK--but vignetting was worse than I thought possible. Photoshop > >managed to lighten the corners and edges (the left edge exhibited > >very bad vignetting) but the the overexposure was so great that > >there was little detail there and what there was, was very fuzzy. In > >my opinion, this is an overrated lens. > > Steve > > Steve, > > that was a clever move. I waited too long to get rid of mine and had > to use it as a trade in. I lost more money on that lens than on any > Leica lens I have traded in. OK, I had bought all the Leica lenses > second hand and the Heliar new, so the comparison is not 100% fair. > > The main advantage of the Heliar was that it taught me to use my 21mm > Leica lens much more frequently than I had been doing before. Other > advantages: it is compact, and it is cheap. But it is not a lens to > put on a Leica M body > > BTW, I guess that you mean underexposure (of the negative) when you > write overexposure. Or is this Photoshop language, with which I am > not familiar, I have to admit? > > Chris > -- > Christer Almqvist > D-20255 Hamburg, Germany and/or > F-50590 Regnéville-sur-Mer, France