Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric , > Interesting. But then, it's quite a bit slower (in terms of physical > dimensions of the lens). So maybe that's a reason why. Wider and faster is > harder to design. But a Canonet? Wow! I don't say that for the ironic effect value of it; the Canonet, when critically adjusted has a pretty great lens and I don't think of it as a cheaply made camera (It seems better built than most any modern SLR). The C'net is very hard to adjust well though and because of focus movement is so short (Maybe 85 degrees from infinty to close focus) even the slightest maladjustment to the rangefinder makes a huge difference on film. The Contax lens has given me amazing night scene resolution and is a great lens, but even with its aspheric surface, its field flatness isn't great (at least it isn't at forty feet) and that's surprising. There was truly no noticeable difference between it and the far less expensive Minolta version, which was equally as good in its strengths and equally as bad in its shortcomings. Regards, Danny Gonzalez