Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/26

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: Enlarging lenses/ a flat field is better for macro
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:46:58 -0800

At 11:32 AM 1/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I respect Jim Brick, but I beg to differ that enlarging lenses make 
>poor camera lenses especially for macro work. 
>
>...
>
>High quality APO enlarging lenses will run circles around any 
>normal lens and most macro lenses when used for close-ups.
>
>Duane Birkey

I agree with you Duane. My experience is that the process lenses (Gold dot
& Red dot Artars, and the like) make great, ultra sharp camera lenses...
when used for close-up photography. They are not as good as real camera
lenses for landscape (far away subjects) work. Quite often lenses that
would qualify as "process" lenses, are tuned for specific wavelengths (such
as carbon arc, xenon, etc.), and work best when used in this environment.
Take Schneider lenses for example. Their Super Symmar HM, MC, & XL are
great field lenses. Their Macro-Symmar is, in their own words, best suited
for close-up photography. Lenses are indeed formulated for different
purposes and I honestly believe that a lens designed for a specific
purpose, is best when used for that purpose. But I cannot tell you how many
landscapes I've taken with my 60 Macro-R and 100/2.8 APO Macro. Many. And
they look just great.

So I believe we're in agreement for the most part.

Jim