Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:26 PM 2/25/2001 -0500, Austin Franklin wrote: >Do you know of any hard evidence that you can show me that substantiates >this? I have taken pictures with and without and have seen a discernible difference at extreme enlargements. I discussed this some years back here on the LUG; maybe this could be found in the List archives. I recall doing the test twice, once with a Leica M6 and 1.4/50 Summicron-M with and without a Leica UV filter, and again with a Rolleiflex 2.8GX, with and without a Rollei Bayo III UVa filter. I still have the pictures, but, God only knows in which box they could be found. I believe I was shooting the enlarger onto the floor: I used a Leitz V35 for the 35mm stuff and a Beseler C-23 for the MF shots, the V-35 with the standard Focotar and the Beseler with a Rodenstock lens. (I know now from Erwin that Schneider makes a better enlarging lens than the Focotar, but I didn't know it then.) Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!