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

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

To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Comparison between old and new 35mm Aspherical summiluxes]
From: "Roger J. Flanigan" <istr1848@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 19:46:56 -0700
Organization: Kindermann (Canada) Inc.



To: Daniel Cardish <dcardish@spherenet.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Comparison between old and new 35mm Aspherical summiluxes]
From: "Roger J. Flanigan" <istr1848@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 19:43:33 -0700
Organization: Kindermann (Canada) Inc.
References: <199609120759.DAA20404@spherenet.com>
Daniel Cardish wrote:

> 
> Thanks for the info.  I'm new to this list, and in the future I'll wait a
> bit longer for my postings to get through.  As per the lens comparisons, how
> do they compare in actual usage?

This is a difficult question. Due to the fact that the aspherical
elements in the old version were ground and polished by hand, each lens
was unique in its optical characteristics. Each had its own "signature"
so to speak. In the new version, there is more uniformity in the
performance of the lenses because the aspherical elements are produced
by a machine and are thus identical every time. So it is impossible to
say if the new version is better than the old one or not. An individual
11874 (=new version) may be better than one individual old-style 35mm
ASPH, but equal to another. One thing is for sure - the new version is
more consistent in its performance. One lens will have the same optical
characteristics as the next. By the way, the July 1996 BAS report gave
this lens a rating of 98 (out of 100). If you want, I will mail you a
copy. Please specify English or French.

Best Regards
Roger Flanigan