Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Comparing Nikon glass and Leica glass
From: Jim Hemenway <>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:15:24 -0500
References: <>


For what it may be worth, you might be interested in how David Ruether
rated the Micro-Nikkor(s)

I've been shooting some chromes with my new, (to me) f2/50mm Summicron-R
on an SL. I'll have to try some pairs with it and my 2.8 Micro-Nikkor to
see if I come up with similar results.  Maybe there'll be twice as much
Nikon stuff up for sale.

Jim wrote:
> All,
> I'm doomed.
> I showed a few rolls of Provia F transparencies to my wife, some of which were taken using my Micro-Nikkor 55mm 1:2.8 with a Nikon F3/T body, and the rest were taken using the Summicron-R 1:2/50mm and an SL2 MOT body (without the motor :)
> Without a loupe, my wife picked out the Leica transparencies with 100% accuracy.  The reason?  The brilliant colour and the "snap" to the images.  Let me repeat, she picked them out with 100% accuracy without a loupe.
> Both lenses were made in the mid-80's.  The major difference appears to be in the way how Leica glass/body handles stray light.  Both suffer from ghosting when the sun is in the frame, but there is so little veiling flair with Leica glass.  I hadn't noticed the difference when I was taking BW pictures, and the great majority of photographs I take had been BW.  Maybe there was a reason why I didn't enjoy taking colour photographs...
> Well, all of this was obvious to you for years, and I learn from mistakes I make.  This will concretise my plan to put my Nikon gear and older Leica lenses (DR Summicron and Elmarit 90mm) up for sale.
> It's your fault!
> :-)

In reply to: Message from ([Leica] Comparing Nikon glass and Leica glass)