Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Esteemed LUGers: I have owned a Canon 35 1.8 for a couple of years now. I feel it is falsely maligned. Mine is critically sharp from f 2.0 on, with a very pleasant "plasticity" to the image. The color is really nice, very rich and deep. Recently I tested the 35 1.8 using my trusty Edmund Scientific Lens Chart. Here are the results (on Ilford FP4, which limits peak resolution somewhat) f 1.8 - 43 center, 30 corner f 2.0 - 48 center, 34 corner f 2.8 - 48 center, 38 corner f 4.0 - 48 center, 48 corner f 5.6 - 54 center, 48 corner f 8.0 - 61 center, 54 corner f 11 - 68 center, 54 corner f 16 - 48 center, 38 corner f 22 - 43 center, 34 corner I think this is top drawer performance for a 1957 fast wide angle. As I recall, I paid $225 for this lens, so it was a very good value. I'm keeping it. I believe the main improvement to the f2 version is limiting the lens to f2, eliminating that slight softness at f 1.8. Both lenses look about the same, have 7 elements in 4 groups and are 28.2 and 28 mm long, respectively (see http://www.canon.co.jp/camera-museum/lens/index.html for details). Allow me to introduce myself, as I am new to this list. I'm a Production Manager for Novo, a web design firm in downtown SF. This year I finally could afford a Leica, a beat up M4-P on which I am using my Canon 35/1.8 & 100/3.5 as well as a DR Summicron. Its a real revelation using the Leica after my Canon 7. The rangefinder is beautifully crisp and very fast and positive in use. The whole camera is fast and lovely to handle. But then, you know all that. I hope you find this helpful. Stephen Attaway