Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] C/V 50/1.1 comment. NOW 35/1.2 also.
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:24:06 -0800
References: <mailman.277.1263276672.73134.lug@leica-users.org> <4B4CA188.9050701@verizon.net>
 
On Jan 12, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Stan Yoder wrote:

> Good to hear the positive comments about both lenses. Erwin Puts is pretty 
> negative about the 35/1.2: very low contrast/micro-contrast at larger 
> apertures, lotsa aberrations, soft edges, fringing, etc., etc. He does 
> note low vignetting and flare.
> 
> This is probably a good example of theoretical vs. experiential judgments.


probably why a lot of us use the lenses, instead of reading Erwin...


:-)


Steve


> 
> Stan Yoder
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
In reply to: Message from s.yoder at verizon.net (Stan Yoder) ([Leica] C/V 50/1.1 comment. NOW 35/1.2 also.)