Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] 50 1.4 Test Results
From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 10:28:21 -0800

Funny, but I was glancing at this one yesterday.  The test numbers were
exceptionally high.  Now by that I mean they were in the 90s for the middle
apertures.  But then again so was Contax/Zeiss, Leica however had a slight
edge as I recall in resolution in one aperture while Zeiss was more even
overall.  I don't know what people are complaining about, but I will try to
review it again in detail.  They thought the Leica lenses to be very high
quality optics.

Peter K

- -----Original Message-----
From: Eric Welch [mailto:ewelch@ponyexpress.net]
Sent: Monday, January 18, 1999 8:40 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] 50 1.4 Test Results


>I have a copy of the test you are referring to.  It was M lenses 35, 50,
and
>75.  Pop photo rated them exceptionally high.  There was no direct
>comparison to another makers' lens in that test.  Justthe 3 Leica lenses.

I think the group was comparing previous tests to other lenses, not Pop
Photo directly doing it.

Did the numbers rate exceptionally high, or the written observations, both?
Even the old 35 Summilux?

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch

Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.