Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 10:45 AM 8/21/1999 +0200, Raimo Korhonen wrote: >If remember >correctly even the guru Marc had trouble finding himself a decent one. So >how many Avenon/Kobalux lenses has he tested? And on what kind of a test is >based the claim that the Heliar is - to use the proper optical term - >*shit*. I´m still waiting for my Heliar, so no other comment at this stage. No, I had no problem finding a good Russar -- the first one I bought, I purchased sight-unseen from Mark Chaney, and it has been a true gem. I had never even seen a Russar before. Others, however, have experienced problems finding a decent Russar or, for that matter, a decent SPS lens of any description -- you just have to be willing to shop around when purchasing hand-assembled lenses, precisely as Leica buyers had to be careful for the same reason until the 1960's. As I have stated time and again, I have never even seen the Avenon/Kobalux nor the Kenko "Voigtlander" lenses, nor do I expect to seem any of these at any time in the future. I have been careful not to be critical of the Avenon/Kobalux lenses as I have never seen any photographs taken with them. My critical comments of the "Heliar" were based on Tom Abrahamson's pictures published in the current VIEWFINDER and on other pictures I have seen taken with the lens. The "Heliar" is a decent, cheap lens. It is a cheap lens, and yields the sort of less-than-sterling images its price would suggest. The Japanese are bound by the same economic realities which afflict the Germans or, for that matter, any other nation: to build a world-class lens, they would have to charge far more than they are charging for the "Heliar". There is an old saw that runs along the lines of, "the dissatisfaction of poor performance lingers long after the thrill of a low price has evaporated". I doubt if this would be the case with an occasional lens such as a 15mm -- many of us would use this lens no more than four or five times a year, so the "Heliar" would do as well as any other lens of like specification. What I object to are the rather wild claims being made for the "Heliar". It is a decent, cheap lens in an unapproachable focal-length. It is not a world-beater. Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!