Thank you. was Re: Nokton versus Summarit

["C.M. Fortunko" <fortunko@boulder.nist.gov>]

Erwin,

Thank you for this fine response.

I bought the Summarit, in mint- condition, for less than $200. My purpose
was to do some experimenting of my own. 

I also own the current Summicron and use it frequently. I agree with you
that we must use the best optics available and alter the results later,
possibly in the darkroom.

BTW, would you be willing to elaborate on the set-up and procedures you use
to evaluate the lenses. Also, can you comment on the current state of the
art in optics. (I am a circuit designer and acoustician, not an optical
designer.)

Sincerely,

Chris



At 09:12 PM 4/14/97 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Erwin,
>>
>>Would you call the Summarit a good portrait lens? Jonathan Eastland refers
>>to this lens as the little gem. Is he right?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>Chris
>>
>Chris, 
>There are a number of statements in Mr. Eastlands books I could not 
>support, nor would I dare to make them. I think it quite remarkable that 
>so many people classify a lens with a weak optical performance as a good 
>portrait lens. 
>As if people pictures must be soft or in other ways defective. The 
>argument is quite often that people (mostly older ones) do not like their 
>skin or wrinkles exposed. And a soft lens would disguise these. 
>Well if we take the portraits by Mapplethorpe, Newton or Avedon as a 
>reference you would see great clearity of detail and a suberb definition, 
>partly because of these photographers using medium format cameras 
>(Hasselblads for instance). By the way the preferred optic of many 'blad 
>portrait users is the Planar 3,5/100mm, one of the sharpest in the line.
>For us poor 35mm users, to even approach this quality we certainly need 
>the best lenses available. And as Leica users we are well served. 
>The Summarit a good portrait lens? Not at all!
>If you need a contemporary portrait lens try the Summilux 1.4/75mm at 
>f/2,8. Or if you would stick with 50mm optics, the Summicron or if you 
>can afford it the Noctilux would be my first choice. 
>The Noctilux in particular gives you a very subtle differentiation in the 
>highlight areas, which in most portraits are easily washed out. 
>Greetings
>Erwin Puts
>
>