Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Fellow LUGers, Recently I contemplated replacing my 1950s 35/3.5 Summaron with a pre-owned 35/2 Summicron for my M2. Even used 35/2 Summicrons come with hefty price tags; around $1,000 to $1,100 at Tamarkin. So, one thought was to investigate the Voigtländer 35/1.7 Ultron. A LUGer alerted me to Erwin Puts’ test report on the Voigtländer lenses. I printed out the report and read it several times. Very interesting indeed. Now, I suppose questioning the omnipotent Mr. Puts amounts to sacrilege. I am quite certain that I will be hunted down mercilessly, tried before a kangaroo court and summarily dispatched to the hereafter. Anyway, here’s my beef. Mr. Puts is comparing apples and oranges when he compares the Leitz 35/2 with the Voigtländer 35/1.7. Obviously, there is going to be a difference in performance but will the casual eye detect this difference in performance? Is it that obvious? I don’t know. The price difference is, of course, staggering. A new 35/2 Summicron (black) runs $2445 vs. $479 for a new Ultron. That’s over five times as much, based on Tamarkin’s website. It’s approximately like comparing a Ferrari with a Miata. A Ferrari at $200,000 is obviously going to perform one hell of a lot better than the $20,000 Miata. You can’t compare ‘em. Also, what are Mr. Puts qualifications? Is he an optical engineer? Does he have the proper optical test equipment? What it all comes down to is that the best test equipment is probably the human eye. At the price of the Leitz lens, it damn well perform five times better than the modest Ultron. What am I going to do? I will continue to enjoy my 1950s 35/3.5 and hope that someday a 35/2 will come along at a fair price. That way my 50/2 and 90/2 from Leitz won’t feel so lonely. Kurt