Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm trying to decide which 50mm M lens to get. I've perused the LUG archives but I have an interesting (imho) twist to the dilemma that, as far as I know, has not been covered already. As you might predict, I have been recommended the 50/2 as it's the sharpest 50 out there, but when one person said "in the same league as the 35/1.4 ASPH in every way", I hesitated. The reason is that I have had two 35/1.4 ASPH, both sold because I ended up prefering the images from my 35/2 non-asph. While the images from the 35/1.4 ASPH were indeed very sharp, especially wide open, it lacked the "3-D" and pleasant out-of-focus rendition of my classic 35/2. My question is, does the 50/2 suffer from this "problem"? I was investigating the 50/1.4 and found out that it has residual field curvature, probably of the same type as in the classic 35/2. I wonder if this is why I prefer the classic 35/2, and if I should go for the 50/1.4 based on this. Or is this too simplistic? Any opinions from people who have used both 50mm lenses? I'll probably end up doing a side by side test myself but I thought I would pick some LUG-brains first ;) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com