Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/16[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 05:29 PM 11/16/97 -0400, Paul Schliesser wrote: >This wasn't unusual with extreme wide angles in the early days of SLRs. A >number of camera brands (including the Leicaflex and the Zeiss Contarex) >had a 21mm non-retrofocus lens which required the mirror to be locked up, >and used scale focusing and a separate viewfinder. Well, much as it pains me to admit EVERYTHING invented by Zeiss isn't perfect, any retrofocus lens will simply NOT perform to the same standard as a REALLY GREAT non-retrofocus lens. The difference will be minute, but it will be there. The Zeiss 38mm Biogon used on the Hassie SWC will outperform the 40mm Distagon. Period. The difference is minor, but it is there, or else, why would Hassie continue to manufacture a non-interchangeable lens camera like this? The 4.5/21 Biogon on the Contax RF and Contarex Bullseye has never been equalled. For its focal length, it remains unparalleled today, almost a half-century since Bertele produced it. As Ludwig said, 'as the jet engine is to aviation and penicillin is to medicine, thus this lens will be to photography'. There's some chutzpah there, guys, but he was pretty damned close to the mark. The 3.5/15 Distagon/Super-Elmar is a stunning lens. But the Hologon, again, outperforms it by most optical parameters. You pays your money and you takes your choice. But, all in all, if you want the best, the very, very best, by all optical parameters, you go with a non-retrofocus lens. Marc firstname.lastname@example.org FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!