Re: [Leica] Leitz vs. Voigtländer

["Bud Cook" <budcook@attglobal.net>]

Erwin does what any tester should do and that's evaluate something on
absolute terms.   It's up to the buyer to decide if the product is worth the
price to the buyer.   I really hate it when someone or something try's to
decide what something is worth.  That's my decision to make.

As I pointed out elsewhere, you can get a new 35 Summicron ASPH for $1,295
(or you can buy a pre-ASPH for under $1,000).

I just bought a new 35 Summicron and traded in a 40 year old 35 Summicron
for it.   That 40 year old lens looked and worked like new.   I just wanted
a lens that had more contrast and wasn't so warm.   The next owner of that
lens can probably use it for another 40 years.

Bud

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt Miska" <k.miska@french-rogers.com>
To: "LUG" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 8:06 AM
Subject: [Leica] Leitz vs. Voigtländer


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