Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]- --Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net> wrote: >>I think I already HAVE described it. With the CZJ Tessar, the image shades from being in-focus to being out-of-focus. With the Leitz Elmar, the softness of the out-of-focus images is exaggerated.<< Sorry Marc but I have to disagree. I don't think you have described it at all. The above description sounds like it could be a result of the scene being shot, the aperture opening hence depth of field, contrast of the scene, lighting, the possibility of either one of the lenses you tried being an abnormality, etc. While I do have a couple of old Elmars (35 and 50) I do not have a CZJ Tessar nor know anywhere I could find one easily. And even if I could the Tessar would seem to have to be of equal focal length and focal ratio and in LTM for anything approaching a valid test. Even if I had one of each lens of equal focal length and ratio it would still require a number of samples of each lens to test more than one to draw a conclusion. The whole thing sounds a bit like petty rivalry and old optical tales handed down. Just because the two design approaches are different doesn't make one an optical cheap trick. Especially if the user/viewer prefers the results of the Leitz lens. It sounds to me like maybe Leitz really had the better idea, even if it was not well received by their competition. But then what do I know? Best, Don _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com