Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]- --simple boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: "cc:Mail Note Part" << But it is still more impossible for a consumer (and you are and I am a consumer)to know if a product is good or not. >> Dominique, you are correct that it is very important for us as comsumers to get as much information as possible regarding lenses, before we purchase them. There are many sources of information. However, so sources are not reliable. Other sources contain information that must be taken with a grain of salt. Other sources have useful informtion, but often that information must be interpreted. Erwin was correct in noting that it is important to understand the undelying basis for the tests, such as CDI's tests. An example is the test series by Popular Photography on the three Leica lenses in 1994 50 1.4, 35 1.4 and 75 1.4). All three tested very poorly at the largest two apertures. The test results were horrible at 1.4 and 2.0. However, at the middle apertures the lenses were absolutely outstanding. Knowing how Popular Photography tests their lenses helps explain this. Popular Photography is very "biased" toward flat field lenses with no curvature of field. All three of these Leica lenses have substantial curvature of field. This makes their test results very bad at the widest apertures. One must look critically at the test reports in order to understand they meaningfully. Tom Shea - --simple boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; name="RFC822.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RFC822.TXT" Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us by mail.sd91.bc.ca (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00) ; Thu, 23 Apr 98 18:27:14 -0800 Return-Path: <owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Received: from by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA05744 Thu, 23 Apr 98 14:48:55 -0700 Received: from imo18.mx.aol.com by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA05738 Thu, 23 Apr 98 14:48:39 -0700 Received: from TEAShea@aol.com by imo18.mx.aol.com (IMOv14.1) id 4EXDa12983 for <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>; Thu, 23 Apr 1998 17:48:35 -0400 (EDT) From: TEAShea <TEAShea@aol.com> Message-Id: <9152e43b.353fb736@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 17:48:35 EDT To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: an objective evaluation of leica M lenses and the noctilux Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 41 Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Precedence: bulk Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us - --simple boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; name="RFC822.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RFC822.TXT" Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us by mail.sd91.bc.ca (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00) ; Thu, 23 Apr 98 19:40:40 -0800 Return-Path: <owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Received: from by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA07955 Thu, 23 Apr 98 18:33:50 -0700 Received: from [204.244.104.125] by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA07940 Thu, 23 Apr 98 18:33:10 -0700 Received: from mail.sd91.bc.ca by sd91.bc.ca (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA14667; Thu, 23 Apr 1998 18:22:36 -0700 Received: from ccMail by mail.sd91.bc.ca (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00) id AA893381424; Thu, 23 Apr 98 18:30:24 -0800 Message-Id: <9804238933.AA893381424@mail.sd91.bc.ca> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00 Date: Thu, 23 Apr 98 18:29:14 -0800 From: "Administrator"<administrator_at_elec__bus@mail.sd91.bc.ca> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Cc: <Administrator@mail.sd91.bc.ca> Subject: [Leica] Message not deliverable Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="simple boundary" Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Precedence: bulk Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us - --simple boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; name="RFC822.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RFC822.TXT" Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us by mail.sd91.bc.ca (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00) ; Thu, 23 Apr 98 20:10:50 -0800 Return-Path: <owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Received: from by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA08831 Thu, 23 Apr 98 19:47:22 -0700 Received: from [204.244.104.125] by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV) id AA08825 Thu, 23 Apr 98 19:47:04 -0700 Received: from mail.sd91.bc.ca by sd91.bc.ca (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA14940; Thu, 23 Apr 1998 19:36:46 -0700 Received: from ccMail by mail.sd91.bc.ca (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00) id AA893385873; Thu, 23 Apr 98 19:44:34 -0800 Message-Id: <9804238933.AA893385873@mail.sd91.bc.ca> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.10.00 Date: Thu, 23 Apr 98 19:44:12 -0800 From: "Administrator"<administrator_at_elec__bus@mail.sd91.bc.ca> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Cc: <Administrator@mail.sd91.bc.ca> Subject: [Leica] Message not deliverable Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="simple boundary" Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Precedence: bulk Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us - --simple boundary--