Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/05/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Eric,
You are probably talking nonsense. How can more glass give you better
results? The optical functions of the two lenses convolve with each other
and the result must be worse on strictly technical grounds. However, your
results may look more interesting and I will buy that. May be by putting the
converter on the Tamron, you injected some of that poorly quantified Leica
three-dimensionality into your negatives. I will buy that.
I am afraid that your "tests" would not meet scientific criteria.
Best regards,
>At 06:21 PM 5/26/96 PDT, you wrote:
>
>>Granted the APO 2X would be wonderfull, I'm sure! But will the extra
>>expense of
>>APO unit be worth it when using it with a decidedly non-APO 90mm Sumicron?
>
>Sure, the better the converter, but better the results. I used the Leica 1.4
>apo converter on a Tamron 300 2.8 and got better results than the lens by
>itself. There's a very good reason why. A converter only uses the central
>part of the image "cone" of a lens, which is the best part. The converter is
>so good that there is no degradation of the Tamron's central performance.
>
>And the 90 Summicron is no slouch, anyway. I've used one for more than a
>decade and loved it.
>
>==========================
>Eric Welch
>Grants Pass Daily Courier
>
>
>
Pax et Lux,
********************************
Chris Fortunko, Boulder, CO
home phone: (303)-494-7246
home e-mail: FortunkoC@aol.com
********************************