Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Maybe it would and I would like to but I do not have a scanner. But these two PopPhoto tests I refer are not so ancient, Canon 1.4/35 is in December 1999 and Leica 1.4/35 M ASPH is in January 2000 - of the Leica lens they say "In terms of performance, this lens is unsurpassed and seldom equalled among 14./35 mm optics." If you look at the charts, the Canon is slightly better at full aperture but the Leica is slightly better at all other apertures. BTW the Pentax 2.0/35 tested in the same issue as Canon gets better ratings than both but it is not 1.4, of course. I do not have tests of current Nikon primes at hand but the only tests I have seen that Nikon is very good is among the 28-105 zooms - and these are not very good in general. All the best! Raimo photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen - -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: Austin Franklin <austin@darkroom.com> Vastaanottaja: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us' <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Päivä: 21. elokuuta 2000 19:34 Aihe: RE: R lens tests (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Why M is so popular?) >> I have quite comprehensive collection of PopPhoto tests and my reading >> suggests quite the opposite. E.g. f.1.4/35mm lenses - the best are Leica >> and Canon. Nikon macros are mediocre at best, Leica is the best they >> have tested. > >Would it be appropriate 'fair use' for you to scan those articles on Leica glass tests and post them, or email them to interested parties? > >