Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/10/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I would say it depends, but some months ago it would have been a M3 with: 35/3.5 Summaron (%60) 50/2 Collapsible Summicron (30%) 90/4 Elmar (10%) I must admit (sigh!, this will DEFINITELY get me thrown out of LUG, but... :-) that I bought a ... (blush!) Konica (glup!!) Hexar (shame!!!) and that the 35 Summaron now stays most of the time in the box (the Hexar lens is that good AND the M3 does not have a 35mm frameline...). OTOH, I have been "rediscovering" the 50 Summicron as a wonderful and allround lens (for some years, I saw the 50 as a "short-tele", because of my preference for the 35mm focal length). BTW, I don't use the Elmar more often because, although sharp, it flares A LOT (I mean, _A_LOT_, I must even be careful when using flash!) and, perhaps because of that, it has much worse contrast than the Summaron (which flares quite a bit on it's own right!) and the Summicron (much better in the flare department than both). Is this common behaviour or just a really bad sample? The coating seems ok, no scratches, uniform colour, no fungus. Does anyone has a clue, besides "dump it, the Elmar was never a good design anyway!" ;-) ? FWIW, Joao - ------------------------------- Joao Vasco Ranito Medidata, SA jvr@inescn.pt Murphy's Law of Combat: "If your enemy is within firing range, so are you."