Re: [Leica] ASPH Flare and harsh Bokeh

["Jim Laurel" <jplaurel@nwlink.com>]

I too am surprised to see so much discussion about ASPH flare.  I've never
found it to be a problem with my 21, 35 and 90 ASPH lenses.  The bokeh is
indeed a little harsher than the older lenses, but considering all the other
advantages of the ASPH designs, I'm willing to accept that.  If I want a
smooth creamy background, I usually go for a 50mm Summicron or Noctilux.

The reviews that the Tri-Elmar has gotten have always surprised me.  I
bought an early one, was very disappointed with its performance and returned
it to the dealer.  When the second generation TE came out, I ran some tests,
but still didn't see the contrast and crispness that I'm used to with Leica
primes.  And a maximum aperture of f4.0 simply defeats the purpose of the
Leica.

- --Jim

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 2:18 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] ASPH Flare and harsh Bokeh


> Sorry, but one of the things that I find most useful - and appealing -
> about the 21 ASPH, 28 Summicron ASPH, and 35 Summilux ASPH is their
> flare suppression. Compare the 35 ASPH to the pre-asph 35 Summilux which
> is one big flare zone.
>
> As for the "harsh bokeh" of the ASPH lenses - no, the bokeh is not as
> smooth as that of the earlier lenses, but the contrast is better, the
> image is "sharper," and there is far less flare - and all of those
> things are far more important - to me - than what the out-of-focus areas
> look like. I'm shooting what's in focus, and if I get gorgeous out of
> focus areas but veiled flaring of the subject, I have a failed image.
>
> The Tri-Elmarit? I have never understood why anyone shooting Leica M for
> the quality of the glass would even consider using anything other than
> the astoundingly good primes.

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html