Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: 35 Summicron comparisons
From: "Roger L. Beamon" <>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 15:18:12 -0700 (MST)

>When comparing lens performance I think it would be wise to remember that 
>any particular example of one variety of Summicron might outperform any 
>particular example of another that varies within the tolerances that 
>Leica set at the time of manufacture. Leica sets narrow tolerances, and 
>we pay for the lenses that they reject, but that doesn't mean that every 
>lens is equal when scrutinized by an eye looking to make distinctions.

As you say, Charlie, there will be differences between examples. Also, as
you say, we pay for the close adherence to QC standards by a company like
Leica. The differences between examples of the same lens with Leica should
be slight and subtle at most. We're talking here about examples of 35
Summicron Ms that range from *no* perceived flare to *great* flare. That's
too much variation, if true, for an outfit like Leica.

Gees, I'd hate to think that expensive Leica binocs vary noticeably from
sample to sample on the retail shelves. My B & L Elites sure don't, and I
doubt that the Zeiss binocs do either.
     Roger Beamon,  Naturalist & Photographer
                               Docent:  Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
                               Leica Historical Society Of America