Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] nokton v. summilux
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 15:36:43 -0400

Come on, guys...Tom, what you have just described is a truly crappy
lens...."Stopped down to f16/22 everything goes quite
blurry and isn't really useable unless you like pictures with an extreme
depth-of-blur." "Wide open it gets pretty soft and low contrast." Can you
imagine how everyone would react if Leica produced a lens like that? Or how
everyone would be laughing their Leica caps off if a new Nikon or Canon lens
got a review like that.

Okay, it's incredibly cheap. But that's because it's a lousy lens that only
gives a decent performance in the mid-range...which means that it isn't an f
1.5 to f 16 lens, it's an f8 to f 11 lens.

And I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't save money on older lenses or
non-Leica brands lenses....Only that it doesn't make sense to wax eloquent
over a lousy lens.

B. D.
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Tom
Finnegan
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 3:12 PM
To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
Subject: Re: [Leica] nokton v. summilux


I think I might get a Summarit until I can afford a Summilux. They have a
wonderful look.
Steve
Annapolis
- ------------------------------

I started off by buying a 50/1.5 Jupiter-3 off of EBay for $75. That way I
figured I could have a lens to use while I saved up for something nicer. I
was pleasantly surprised to see how well the Jupiter performed in practice
for a lens that was designed in the 1930's and built in 1956. At the mid
apertures, with HP5+ handheld, you wStopped down to f16/22 everything goes
quite
blurry and isn't really useable unless you like pictures with an extreme
depth-of-blur.ould be hard pressed to see a
difference with modern lenses.  Wide open it gets pretty soft and low
contrast, but with a
similar 'finger-paint' quality to the bokeh that the Summarit has. For
people pictures it can work well if you like a retro look. I would be
interested in comparing it side-by-side with the Summarit. Considering it's
cheap price, for B&W work it would be hard to beat the price/performance
ratio of the Jupiter-3.

Tom Finnegan
Seattle