Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/01

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Heliar problem
From: Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 17:08:04 -0700
References: <200104010801.AAA23869@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <6DCE3766.69D9178F.0021EE48@netscape.net>

At 5:09 PM -0400 4/1/01, Steve Huntley wrote:
>OK, perhaps the title of my message overstated what I meant to say. 
>The 15mm Heliar was been praised on the LUG and elsewhere. I didn't 
>expect Summicron or Elmarit quality but I was expecting something 
>that would be acceptable, and the severe vignetting this lens 
>demonstrated was not, in my view, acceptable. If the Hologon has as 
>severe vignetting as the Heliar I used, then I'd say its reputation 
>is not justified either. Another Lugger has suggested that maybe the 
>Heliar I purchased was an individual lemon and not representative of 
>the actual qualify of the lens. I'll try to find out more about this.
>    Steve
>
>Ken Iisaka wrote:
>>
>>  Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 20:46:49 -0800
>>  From: "Ken Iisaka" <ken@iisaka.org>
>>  Subject: Re: [Leica] Not Leica quality
>>  Message-ID: <004301c0ba66$c3b01020$e904c53f@pacbell.net>
>>  References: <200103312218.OAA19326@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> 
>><0B684C41.1714BACE.0021EE48@netscape.net>
>>
>>  >     On Thursday I bought a 15mm Heliar. On Friday, I shot photos with it,
>>  developed the film and printed (via Photoshop) the results. On Saturday, I
>>  returned the lens and got a refund.
>>  >     Sharpness/resolution was pretty good in the center, contrast was
>>  OK--but vignetting was worse than I thought possible. Photoshop managed to
>>  lighten the corners and edges (the left edge exhibited very bad vignetting)
>>  but the the overexposure was so great that there was little detail there and
>>  what there was, was very fuzzy. In my opinion, this is an overrated lens.
>>  >     Steve
>>
>>  Of course it's not Leica quality.  It's not a Leica, nor has Leica ever made
>>  a 15mm lens for use with LTM and M cameras.  So what reference is there for
>>  a "Leica-quality" 15mm lens?
>>
>  > Still, it outperforms a Zeiss Hologon at less than 1/20 of the cost.

I have had a fair bit of experience with wide angle lenses, and at 
present own about 20 lenses that cover 90 degrees or more in various 
formats. Only one of these, the 15/8 Hologon for Leica, is not in 
regular use anymore, although there are still circumstances in which 
it is the best choice.

Of the 15mm lenses I have at present, the Heliar is the best 
performing one. True, it has more light falloff than the 15mm SLR 
lens I have, but in most other regards it is better. It is also 
better than the 15/8 Hologon (I've written extensively on this; see 
the archives). I don't find the light falloff too objectionable, but 
of course that is an individual call. The light falloff is less, in 
my opinion, than that of the 43mm Mamiya 7 lens, which doesn't have 
to cover nearly as big an angle, and is not much different than that 
of the 21/3.4 which I, and many others, still consider an outstanding 
lens. The light falloff is a lot less than that of either Hologon, 
but of course it neither comes with nor is it easy to attach a center 
filter. On the 12mm I can and sometimes do attach a center filter.

As far as flare resistance, resolution and contrast the 15 Heliar is 
not a 21 ASPH, but then _NO_ other wide angle in my experience is. It 
is, however, a lens that produces pictures that are not out of place 
among Leica photos, and Leica doesn't offer a competitor. If you buy 
a 15mm lens based on demanding optical performance that equals the 
21, 35 or 90 ASPH performance, fine, stay away from the Heliar (but 
also stay away from most of Leica's old lenses) but if you buy one 
based on angle of view and abilty to create content that the others 
can't, then the 15 is not a bad choice.

BTW, if you had more light falloff on one side than the other, you 
had a seriously defective lens. This would not be due to some 
decentering of the adapter, as you would run out of image circle 
before any appreciable light falloff on one side would be visible, 
but optical decentering or failure of all the lens elements to have 
coincident axes.

- -- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com

In reply to: Message from rshuntl@netscape.net (Steve Huntley) (Re: [Leica] Leica Users digest V19 #267)