Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In einer eMail vom 31.08.1997 19:08:47, schreiben Sie: >I would be willing to mail them to you, Ted, to give you the "Leica >Challenge". Perhaps you could then forward them along to another >interested LUGer, who could add his/her own guesses as to which lens took >which picture. Please, include me into your pix mailing list, specially if you do your shots in b/w. Additionally, I'd be highly interested in a comparison between different 35 mm-s also. In my experience, e.g. the 2/35 Nikkor AI (the one with the moving inner lens part), and the 2/35 Summicron M are rather similar in b/w pixs (specially FP 4) up to available or rainy day light of "darker or equal" than f 4 and 1/125. Opposite, they are completely different in color slides: while the Nikkor is more yellow, the Summicron M tends to be more blue. Contrary, while the Elmarit M 2.8/90 or Summicron M 2/90 differ significantly from the Nikkor 2/85 AI, both in b/w (FP 4, Tri-X) and in color slides (Ektachrome), the difference to the old Nikon F 1.8/ 85 is far less evident (at least with Tri-X) up to f4 and difficult available light. Further, I feel it extremely difficult to find any difference between the 3.5/ 55 Micro Nikkor AI in comparison to the Summicron R or M or Summilux M (up to f 8). Specially here I need to admit (shame on me ! ), that I misjudge till today almost all b/w 3.5/ 55 Micro Nikkor pix as Leica Summicron pix - although I took them myself, and although I usually see the M Leica/ Nikon difference almost immediately. Alf