Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/05/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In message <2.2.32.19960520061220.006cf3d4@gp.magick.net>, Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net> writes >>I used to read lens tests avidly and chose lenses on that basis- up >>until I got my first results from Leica lenses. Then I noticed something >>very interesting; I'd been reading test results pertaining to Leica >>lenses along with tests of everything else and never once had those >>tests indicated the actual results Leica lenses give in practice! > >Have you seen the BAS tests? I find them to accurately reflect what I've >experienced and heard about the Leica lenses they've tested. You can get >copies from Leica. It's done by a highly respected German gentleman for >Fotomagazine. Er, actually, yes. I'll selectively eat a few of my words from my earlier post now that my memory has been jogged. If I'm forced to be totally accurate, then I do recall that these BAS tests (copies of which are now in the great and untidy depository of my bookshelves, possibly not to be seen again for a long time) did seem to show remarkable optical characteristics of some Leica lenses. I vaguely remember that the current 28/2.8 M lens seemed almost ridiculously good, and have probably suppressd that information in my mind because I have the earlier version!... BUT- these were the only tests I've seen so far that seem to do this, and the remainder- and I've seen a lot of them- I've got copies of lens tests coming out of my ears- seemed to place Leica lenses along with Nikon, Pentax, Canon, etc, and referred to resolution, contrast, and distortion, etc, but NOT to the "look" of the lenses, which for me is the most important consideration. -- joe b.