Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well, yes, I'd suggest that something might be wrong, given the images the particular lens produces. You and I have both been on the LUG long enough for you to know that I could give the hind end of a rat where Lieca rates in terms of anything - I am not a Leica company acolyte, I don't collect, I don't buy equipment as jewelry...either it works for ME or it doesn't period. That said, the 35 Summilux ASPH is one of the consistently best lenses I have ever owned. Period. As is the 28 Summicron ASPH. And, therefore, I am quite puzzled by the comparatively low mark it got from PhotoDo.... That's all. :-) B. D. Dante Stella wrote: > > B.D.: > > Something is wrong with the testing? I say live by the sword, die by it. > People on this group are fascinated with MTF and even more fascinated with > resolution testing. If that's the shorthand you want to use, you are > going to find testing regimes were Leica comes out behind (note that Leica > rarely publishes MTF figures). If the testing procedure is done > consistently, and it makes some Leica lenses better, then you have to > accept that some will do worse. Questioning the systemic considerations > that lead to a low score for one lens questions the high scores too. > > When it comes down to it, no modern prime lens would ever do poorly > enough, resolution-wise for it to be the drag on an optical system that > ends in output: a "good print" is 6lp/mm on the negative (precisely why > minilab prints can never be indicative of quality); scanning, 20lp/mm; > printing b/w, 60lp/mm. The real problem is substandard image-processing > equipment. MTF is a combination of resolution and contrast, and it is > safe to assume that the floor for making "good" prints could be quite low. > > The upshot of this is that the only compelling reason to buy one > particular lens over another, length and relative aperture being equal, > is a difference in aberration characteristics, or the "fingerprint." > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html