Re: [Leica] report conclusions

["Bud Cook" <budcook@ibm.net>]

Erwin,
A very important lens characteristic to me (if not THE most important) is
color rendition.  Is the lens warm, neutral or cool?  Do you characterize
ALL Leica lenses has having similar color transmission (including lenses
like the Noctilux)?

How about the non-Leica lenses you are now testing?
Regards,
Bud Cook
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 1999 2:08 PM
Subject: [Leica] report conclusions


> I shot comparison images on the same film (lens by lens) (my bayonet is
the
> first item to exchange because of usage) and noted that the Ricoh, Skopar
> lenses exhibit second generation characteristic. Overall the images are
> duller and a bit muddier than the current Leica lenses. Still the Ricoh is
> better than the S-Angulons and the Skopar not having a predecessor can be
> compared only to the Elmarit-ASPH 24.
> A most interesting phenomenon became visible with these
side-by-side-shots.
> The Ricoh and Skopar give images with a grainier pattern and with grain
> clumps that are rougher than when the Leica lenses are used. This is
caused
> by the lower aberration content of the Ricoh/Skopar lenses. When
> aberrations are abundant the light rays emanating from a light point
source
> do not converge to one point in the image but have a more random pattern
> around the central core. These more widely spread rays energise more
silver
> grainaround the center spot and randomly so. A rough clumping is the
> result.
> Modern Leica lenses produce a smooth pattern of very tighly contained
> grainclumps, which helps preserve the rendition of very fine detail and
the
> smooth gradation of  fine light modulations.
> Leica lenses exhibit a crisp clarity  of the finest possible detail, that
> the Japanese contenders can not match.
> On its own the Ricoh and Skopar lenses are excellent value and especially
> the Skopar at f/4 is on axis a strong performer. The outer zones are no
> match for the Leica (at f/2,8!!) but still it is a tempting lens.
> The Hexanon 2,4/50 is a Jekyll and Hyde poposition. With its slightly
loose
> tube it is a questionable offering. I made my comments based on the
optimum
> position and assuming that quality control will tighten up, it has the
> potential to be one of the first contemporary lenses to be a threat to a
> Leica lens. Its optimum performance at f/2,8 is simply better than the
> Elmar-M 2.8/50 and even at its worst setting would kill the older version
> of the Elmar.
> The excellent performance of the Ricoh and Skopar are partly the result of
> the modest aperture. The higher aberration content will not be visibly
> buried as this will be among other things in the depth of field.
> The generally weaker performance in the field is also a characteristic
that
> distinguishes these lenses from the
> Leica lenses.
>
> The Hexanon 1.2/60 is next
>
>
> Erwin
>
>