Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mike Johnston asked >>> CDI latest issue (221 Feb) has a test of the Apo-Summicron-M 90/2.0 ASPH. The lens obtains 5 stars for quality, 2 for price/performance and 2 for "cote d'amour" (= subjective likening of the lens).<<< Why a mere 2 for _cote d'amour_? Do they explain this? - - --Mike Mike I got my CDI Friday. Leica lenses always get a low(ish) cote d'amour. CDI ALWAYS says the price is "ridiculous', "offensive" or something. I always take their text with a pinch of salt. Whilst i worked in France I noted that the French photographic mags were as strongly pro Nikon as the British press were pro Canon. There is also an interesting article on low light photography. Lenses are rated on their performance wide open as well as for general use. I think this is the first time I have seen an article rating lenses in this way. It seems to me FWIW that if you use lenses mainly at f5.6 and smaller apertures any lens made in the last 30 years is pretty good! Lenses rated as particularly good wide open included the EOS 135 f2, Contax G 45 f2 (but not the 35), Konika M Hexanon 50 f2, Leica 35 f2 asph, 50 f2 (M & R), Nikon Noct Nikor 58 f1.2, Pentax 85 f1.4 (best of the lot). Additional lenses mentioned as particularly good in low light from previous testswere Canon 35 f1.4, 50 f1, 85 f1.2, 300 f4 IS, Leica 35 f1.4 asph, 90 f2 (Noctilux does badly!!), Apo Elmarit R 180 f2.8, pentax 43 f1.9. As Mike said in an earlier post some lenses that measure well do not have a good look, and vice versa. cheers frank