Re: [Leica] First M system choices

[Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>]

At 10:27 PM 5/6/98 -0400, you wrote:

>Someone suggested going with a 90 instead of the 75...my pocketbook
>would thank me (I think), but can the 90 compete with the 75 optically?

I think the "look" of the 75 is what's special. It's not much sharper than
a 90 Summicron M. But the new 90 is going to be a killer, no doubt about
it. Any lens Leica puts the term "Apo" on is going to be amazing, if
experience is any teacher.

>     As far as ASPH or non in 35mm, are there big differences betweeen
>them in the middle aperatures?  I realize wide open will be much better

As I hear it, between all the relatively current lenses (old and new
Summilux, old and new Summicrons, ASPH and non) there isn't a significant
difference between any of them at middle apertures. But I can tell you for
sure that the ASPH Summilux is the king of control in the flare area.
Someone noted in some unusual situations, it's not perfect. That's fine
with me. I just shot a picture yesterday against some very strong light,
with the foreground lit by indirect light. 

If I had been using Nikon in that situation, I would expect to see the
evidence of flare as I pulled the negatives off the film reel and held it
over the light table . That's the kind of flare that kind of situation
would produce. When I looked at the negs, I was impressed with how "clean"
the negatives looked at a distance. In the loupe, and in the scanner, it
just blew me away with the lack of any flare whatsoever. Not only that, but
even after brightening up the foreground, the detail in the extremely lit
background was full of detail. With a little Photoshop work, there would be
no way to do such an easy job of this picture without masking and major
manipulation in an enlarger.

My old 35 Summicron M (non-ASPH) would have done pretty good in this
situation. But nothing like the ASPH Summilux.

=========

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO

Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes