Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It's better wide open, meaning sharper pictures in available-light situations, the raison d'etre of the M camera. I've also found it more resistant to flare and ghosting when shooting contre jour. That's the extent of my French, but it might impress her. If you need anything in Latin, try res ipsa loquitur. Stay away from ipse dixit (a judge cranked that one out during oral argument yesterday, and it was the first time I'd heard it since first-year Contracts; fortunately, it was directed at my opponent). Chuck Albertson Seattle, Wash. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ogilvie, Simon" <sogilvie@adaptivebroadband.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 2:15 AM Subject: [Leica] 35 Summicrons (was Re: Voigtlander Ultra-Wide - Heliar 12mm f/5.6 Aspherical) > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 at 11:03:36 EDT, Joe Sobel asked: > > ><< I "upgraded" my old 35mm > > Summicron for a new Aspheric one yesterday at a local camera > > fair, and that was a hard one to justify to my wife. >> > > > > How did she find out? > > Well, I told her... :-) I guess she'd never have > noticed if I hadn't told her, but that wouldn't be > very honest would it! She's a photographer herself > so she would understand a convincing photographic > argument, but I'm struggling to concoct one... > What it boils down to is this: > > Exactly how much "better" is the 35 Summicron ASPH > than the previous non-ASPH, and in what areas is > it considered "better"? > > Simon. >