Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/01

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Photodo ratings for 35mm Summilux -MASPH and 50mmSummilux-M
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:18:14 -0500
References: <Pine.SOL.4.33.0111011252420.26512-100000@gorf.gpcc.itd.umich.edu>

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

In reply to: Message from Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu> (Re: [Leica] Photodo ratings for 35mm Summilux -MASPH and 50mm Summilux-M)