Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 8:53 AM -0800 3/13/00, Paul Chefurka wrote: >On the other hand, I have real trouble discerning differences between >lenses. On Saturday I was in a used camera shop looking at 'blads, and the >owner was conducting a challenge. Two sets of three 4x6 B&W prints - one >set shot on a G2 with the 45/2.0, one from an M4P with a 50/2.0 Elcan. I >was forced to participate because everyone there knew I was a Leica user. >On all three prints I unerringly picked out ... the Contax :-/ The prints >looked identical in all respects except the Contax shots had noticebly >better shadow detail. Oh the shame... 4x6??? 50 Elcan??? Somebody is actually using the Elcan to take pictures? It's worth a whole lot as a collectible, but not that much as a shooter, since it's a simplified lens and not nearly as good as many other 50's, and not likely as good as the 45/2 Contax. If I had an Elcan, I would put it up on eBay and buy something expensive and useful (or use it for my income tax installment). * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com