[Leica] Age Differences

[Phil Marcus <pmarcus@swbell.net>]

I just bought my first Leica, a black classic M6.  With it came a new 50mm
Summicron.  I have two other lenses, a 28mm Elmarit (II) and the
much-maligned 90mm Tele-Elmarit (off visiting Sherry for a cleanup).

I haven't shot a lot of film yet, but one of the factors (the big one) that
influenced my purchase was the result of an informal optical comparison
between similar Nikon and Leica optics that I made years ago.  I would have
to have been blind not to be able to see the differences in rendering on the
same subject, at the same time.  In fact, it was the results from a 90mm
Elmarit, vintage ca. 1960 that convinced me that I needed to buy this stuff!

My question:  I've been told that there are big differences in the
contrast/overall rendering between new lenses like my Summicron and ones
about twenty years old or so like my Elmarits.  Folks have gone so far as to
say my Tele-Elmarit doesn't look like a 90mm Elmarit should - that it's a
hybrid.  To me, it is far more like other Leica glass than anything I've
ever shot from Japan!  The Summicron is very sharp, and seems snappier that
very old lenses, yet still has a very different character than anything that
I and the IRS used to own that said Nippon Kogaku on it.  (Yes, I know I
dropped the participle, and yes, I had a long dark career as a pro).

What's going on here?  If you want relatively close color from all of your
lenses, must they be of the same vintage?

Phil