Re: [Leica] shall I compare thee to a Summilux? :)

[apbc <apbc@public1.sta.net.cn>]

Mr Judah-"Ben" Hur-Holmes TecoBen MichaelJackson-Ben (!)

The 45mm TS-E is far too big for me to consider as an alternative to =
any Leica 50. In any case it is, as mentioned before, difficult IME to =
focus manually with any EOS camera.

Yes I would agree that many Leica R lenses seem excessively heavy - 50% =
or more heavier than many of their rivals' versions (but then they are =
built to last and you can't have it both ways). There are exceptions - =
the 80/1.4 springs to mind as a package that is a lot smaller and =
lighter than the Canon 85/1.2 which is the only comparable EOS optic. =
And if you cannot tell that the 85/1.8 and 100/2.0 are flimsily =
constructed (relative not only to Leica standards but also to the =
earlier Canon FD standards), that the focussing rings flex when held =
firmly and have play even when new then fine - enjoy them and be happy =
your experience is different to mine.

On a related note I find there to be a worrying tendency for Solms to =
produce ever heavier lenses: the APO modular series, the 180 Apo, 28mm =
R and M, 50/1.4 R, 35mm M 1.4 and 2.0 ASPHs, the 80-200 R and more are =
significantly heavier than the lenses they replace. To say nothing of =
the R8 which seems to be a spectacular growth...I wonder if there is =
some kind of marketing rationale behind this - to distinguish Leica's =
perceived traditional construction from the Japanese high tech =
plastics? NB Leica was paradoxically one of the first lens makers to =
use polycarbonates in lens construction (e.g. the 50/2 R and the 35/2 =
non-ASPH last version Summicron M). 

<Well where are the fast Leica lenses?>
35/1.4, 35/2.0, 50/1.4, 50/2.0, 80/1.4, 90/2.0 - all built to =
professional standards of rigidity and durability to say nothing of the =
image quality. Yes Canon has a number of super speed fixed focal length =
lenses in the L series which because of the size, weight and optical =
characteristics render them special use optics IMHO. In the 50mm range =
I have owned or currently own 28-70L, 28-105, 28-135, 50/1.4, 50/1.8 =
and the only one of these which I would regard as a fully professional =
grade tool is the 28-70L - the others get out of alignment very easily =
and only the latter is usable with my Lee filter system. Neither of =
these last problems affects any Leica R lens in the 50mm range.

I wrote =BEbetween super wide (say 17mm) and 100mm> and then you wrote =
<Well, let's take 135mm> and <Or we'll go to super-wide. The Leica =
15/3.5(...)> If you sidestep the point I was making then sure you have =
an answer...

But to take yr points- the 14/2.8 is smaller and lighter and cheaper =
than the Leica 15mm but the two examples of the 14 I have shot with are =
quite fuzzy in the corners: I have asked Leica 15 users about this and =
they say FWIW the corners are very sharp. My Nikon 15mm was much better =
in this respect than the Canons for that matter. As for the 135 - it is =
a good lens but IMHO is not built to the same standards of durability =
and long-term fixability as the Leica 135: but for proof of this we =
will have to talk again in 20 years! As a pro I would still choose the =
Canon one though, if it was a lens I had much use for (which i don't).

As for the Chasseurs report - for what they are worth (too simplistic =
IMO) you are confusing light fall-off with fall off of sharpness: two =
entirely different criteria. And what are they measuring in the =
'corner' - is it the corner 1mm or somewhere in the outer 3rd of the =
image or what? My experience is the the outer 4-5mm of the image circle =
within the frame is quite poor for the Canon EF 14mm, 20mm, 24TS-E, =
28mm (1.8 and 2.8) and the 17-35 at wider settings and very poor for =
the 20-35 at the wider settings. IMHO this shows that Canon make lenses =
to a different set of quality criteria to Leica: the wideangles are =
consistently, apparently by design, uneven in image quality. The Leica =
M and R wide angle series are not in general so ambitious in maximum =
aperture or zoom-ery but are remarkably consistent in performance: for =
me that is a preferable state of affairs but you are free to decide =
what is right for you. 

Be glad you have a choice - one day your criteria may change.

Rgds

Adrian

 


Adrian Bradshaw
Photojournalist
Shanghai, China