RE: [Leica] 35mm Summicron, version differences

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

You are both absolutely right - Erwin's tests deal with optical absolutes,
not real-world use. Just as we only use a tiny percentage of our theoretical
brain capacity, so the vast majority of us on this list are incapable of
tweaking the last bits of performance out of Leica lenses of the past
several generations - or telling the difference between them...

Until, as JD points out, we get to the Aspherical versions. Having had the
last pre-asph version of the 21, and having had a pre-asph 35 Summilux, and
replaced them both with the ASPH versions, I will say that anyone who as
reasonably good eyesight can tell the difference between the performance of
those lens versions.

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 John
> Brownlow
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 5:17 PM
> To: LUG
> Subject: Re: [Leica] 35mm Summicron, version differences
>
>
> on 7/8/00 5:00 pm, Dan Cardish at dcardish@microtec.net wrote:
>
> > This has been my point (sometimes misunderstood) about Erwin's reports.
> > Erwin is definitely able to find differences between lenses,
> and I have no
> > argument with people who find those differences important, but I believe
> > that many LUGers needlessly base their buying decisions in the
> belief that
> > their photographs will be significantly better with the
> "better" lens.  I
> > am convinced that most LUGers (certainly I include myself here) cannot
> > distinguish a photograph taken with an older "poor" lens from one taken
> > with the latest and greatest version, when viewing the print as
> it normally
> > would be viewed.
>
> I agree on your general point but respectfully disagree on one
> specific: I'm
> sure most people even on THIS group would be able to distinguish between a
> 35 pre asph lux and the asph version wide open.
> --
> Johnny Deadman
>
> http://www.pinkheadedbug.com
>
>
>