Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/05/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]- --------------C2B2067613A9046B8D1523A5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > A couple of weeks ago, I felt the urge of having a bit of a go at field testing some lenses I had never used, or on some very rare occasions only.All lenses with one exeption where of 50mm focal length. The individual lenses where: A cannon F1.2, a Summar f2 non coated , a Summar F2 coated, a Voigtlander Nocton F1.5 and a Lens head from an old 1914 Kodak folding Camera. F7.7 130mm, The last lens I used with the Visioflex III. The Camera used was a M3. My wife decided it would be a good idea to go in to Melbourne and its surroundings and select each motif from there. i took us both days of the weekend, but by the time we finished, we just realized how little we really knew about the city we lived in, and how beautiful Melbourne is. We also found lots of hitherto unknown cafe's and pubs. To the tests: All lenses where equipped with lens hoods. As big and as bulky as possible. Each scene was done with all lenses. No tripod was used. The Cannon F1.2. This is a very impressive looking lens, but the performance is not. The contrast was medium and so was the sharpness. When you looked at the print, it didn't really grab you. For a better word, The picture looked boring. Why Cannon ever released a lens like this, is beyond me, it must have given Cannon a bit of a bad name. The Voigtlander Nocton F1.5 Was just the opposite. The moment i looked at the print, I was taken with it. It was the type of print one wanted to look again and again. Fabulously Sharp and a lovely contrast. Even when shooting nearly at the Sun, could I detect any flair. The out of focus areas are smooth and not at all fuzzy. I think this lens is even better than my Dual Range Summicron. The 2 Summars. Both, the coated and the un coated had very clean glass with no scratches at all on the front element. The picture quality of both lenses where very pleasing. especially around F4 to F5.6. The un coated lens, had a bit less contrast and showed some flare, when photographing towards the sun. Both , the contrast and flair where mainly noticeable, when the prints of both lenses where compared with each other. The coated version was a very good performer. I don't think, I will use the un coated version much. It is to hard to control. The coated version however, i think is good enough to go anywhere with and not be ashamed of the quality it gives. I also liked it wide open, when the image looked a bit softer, specially around the edges. In a couple of prints, this enhanced the way it looked. The focus was more to the important part in the middle of the print. It was somehow a bit gemuetlicher looking. But this worked only on some prints. The last one, was an old Kodak lens. F7.7 130mm Kodak Anastigmat. Vintage 1914 or so and of course un coated. The glass was clean. I think this is a 3 element lens. (Cooke triplet) It was used with the Visioflex. This lens gave me the biggest surprice. The image it took, was sharp, the contrast was very low, but this made the prints look like pastel drawings. This gave a fantastic effect. One prints showed some Pine trees on the left, and a track going past. The track was a beige colour with some darker wet spots. It looked like it was painted with a soft brush. This was definitely one of the Prints I will hang up . By the way, the film used was standard Fuji Colour negative 100ASA. The moral of the story: Try different lenses on your Leica. No matter how old or strange. Some may really not be worth while. (The Cannon 1.2) While other have certain qualities you can not reach with the very modern lenses. Horst Schmidt. - --------------C2B2067613A9046B8D1523A5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <FONT SIZE=-1>A couple of weeks ago, I felt the urge of having a bit of a go at field testing some lenses I had never used, or on some very rare occasions only.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1>All lenses with one exeption where of 50mm focal length. The individual lenses where: A cannon F1.2, a Summar f2 non coated , a Summar F2 coated, a Voigtlander Nocton F1.5 and a Lens head from an old 1914 Kodak folding Camera. F7.7 130mm, The last lens I used with the Visioflex III.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>The Camera used was a M3.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>My wife decided it would be a good idea to go in to Melbourne and its surroundings and select each motif from there.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>i took us both days of the weekend, but by the time we finished, we just realized how little we really knew about the city we lived in, and how beautiful Melbourne is. We also found lots of hitherto unknown cafe's and pubs.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>To the tests: All lenses where equipped with lens hoods. As big and as bulky as possible.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>Each scene was done with all lenses. No tripod was used.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>The Cannon F1.2. This is a very impressive looking lens, but the performance is not. The contrast was medium and so was the sharpness. When you looked at the print, it didn't really grab you.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>For a better word, The picture looked boring. Why Cannon ever released a lens like this, is beyond me, it must have given Cannon a bit of a bad name.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>The Voigtlander Nocton F1.5 Was just the opposite. The moment i looked at the print, I was taken with it. It was the type of print one wanted to look again and again. Fabulously Sharp and a lovely contrast. Even when shooting nearly at the Sun, could I detect any flair. The out of focus areas are smooth and not at all fuzzy. I think this lens is even better than my Dual Range Summicron.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>The 2 Summars. Both, the coated and the un coated had very clean glass with no scratches at all on the front element. The picture quality of both lenses where very pleasing. especially around F4 to F5.6. The un coated lens, had a bit less contrast and showed some flare, when photographing towards the sun. Both , the contrast and flair where mainly noticeable, when the prints of both lenses where compared with each other. The coated version was a very good performer. I don't think, I will use the un coated version much. It is to hard to control. The coated version however, i think is good enough to go anywhere with and not be ashamed of the quality it gives. I also liked it wide open, when the image looked a bit softer, specially around the edges. In a couple of prints, this enhanced the way it looked. The focus was more to the important part in the middle of the print. It was somehow a bit gemuetlicher looking. But this worked only on some prints.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>The last one, was an old Kodak lens. F7.7 130mm Kodak Anastigmat. Vintage 1914 or so and of course un coated. The glass was clean. I think this is a 3 element lens. (Cooke triplet)</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>It was used with the Visioflex.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1>This lens gave me the biggest surprice. The image it took, was sharp, the contrast was very low, but this made the prints look like pastel drawings. This gave a fantastic effect. One prints showed some Pine trees on the left, and a track going past. The track was a beige colour with some darker wet spots. It looked like it was painted with a soft brush. This was definitely one of the Prints I will hang up .</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>By the way, the film used was standard Fuji Colour negative 100ASA.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>The moral of the story: Try different lenses on your Leica. No matter how old or strange. Some may really <B>not </B>be worth while. (The Cannon 1.2) While other have certain qualities you can not reach with the very modern lenses.</FONT><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P><FONT SIZE=-1>Horst Schmidt.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <FONT SIZE=-1></FONT> <P> </HTML> - --------------C2B2067613A9046B8D1523A5--