Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 06:35 PM 11/9/96 EDT, you wrote: >I have to count myself amongst those that have found the 35mmF2 Summicron >(M latest) to be VERY prone to flare. I must say that I was no less than a >tad disgusted by its performance in this regard as, for the price, I could >get two of another brand which would flare a lot less. > My Summilux 35 is much worse, being virtually unusable in backlit >conditions and its place amongst my kit is becoming more precarious by the >day. (Anyone considering the purchase of a 35 Summilux must be in dire need >of a picture of ANY quality in low light conditions) In all other respects >my Summicron is a gem and I'm more than just a tad peeved to think that I >would have to shell out the ludicrous asking price of an aspherical example >to do away with something as basic as flare. > In virtually all other respects Leica glass is superb and worth >every penny of the asking price but flare control would seem to be >something they never quite got a handle on with some lenses. > Would anyone have any ideas why this would be so? >J.Redfern > I have both the standard 35 summilux (current mount), and the 2 element aspherical. At wide apertures, the newer one is clearly better, but at normal shooting openings, the old lens more than holds its own. For a lens that was introduced in 1960, I think that it has aged quite nicely. What was Nikon producing that year that is still viable now? > > Dan Cardish <dcardish@spherenet.com> <http://www.spherenet.com/dcardish/photo.htm>