Re: [Leica] Leica Days, Seattle

[Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>]

>To me it doesn't make sense.
>In how many lens lineups is the 28 or any wide angle lens the sharpest on the
>list? I think none!
>Usually they sharpest is a normal or a short tele. I'd assume all these years
>that those were the optics the most capable and easiest to make the sharpest.
>Wide angles have been great, the 38 Biogon, Super Angulons and 
>Leicas of course
>but as sharp as their sharpest normals to short teles?
>No i don't' think so and they also suffer from a lot less contrast i 
>think too.
>The specs on a great wide angle would make the specs on an OK normal.
>I'd like to know what Leica did to make a 28 of all focal lengths the sharpest
>on their lens lineup.
>Are the MTF charts available? (not that i know how to read them)
>
>
>That's a hard one to swallow.
>
>
>Mark Rabiner
>
>Portland, Oregon
>USA
>
>http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/

In the 70's I had a 28/5.6 Summaron for a while. This was the 
'sharpest' lens I have ever used or tested. On High Contrast Copy 
film, the 'Tech Pan' of the era, it tested between 160 and 200 lppm, 
the highest I've ever come across by a wide margin. It was a rather 
problematic lens, with severe light falloff, but it was sharp! It was 
amazing. Just rather pointless.

All I ask for now is a reasonable balance to let the image show 
through, not necessarily one performance aspect of the lens. The 90 
A-A is sharp enough for anything I care to do. The 28 probably is as 
well. So is the 35/1.4A and the 21/2.8A. I don't worry about it. The 
old Summaron may have been sharper. I don't worry about it. I take 
pictures.

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