Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Fred, I did not see any responses so I thought I would stumble in. I also have that lens and, yes, it is subject to veiling glare under certain conditions. I have not used the lens that much since getting my 35s so this is all from memory. As far as I understand, the current version is similarly afflicted. Neither is not as bad as the 90/2.8 TE. The veiling glare only occurs under when the "brightness" is in a certain position, in the mid-field of the image if I remember correctly. Oft reviled Mr. Johnson also pointed this out as a significant flaw of the 50/2. Try a little experimenting to narrow down where it occurs and learn a few German swear words for when those situations arise :-). The 35/2 (A and non-A) and the 35/1.4A are much better at handling back lit situations. I do not know how the other 50s (Summi and Nocti) perform in these situations but perhaps others will chime in with their experiences. John Collier > From: Fred Rosenberg <fdr@netidea.com> > > I use a 1970's Summicron that flares in a back lit situation > including any sky (as little as 10-20% of the frame). Contrast is > essentially reduced to zilch across the entire frame. A recent cleaning > hasn't changed a thing. It's always used with a hood. What gives? Is > this characteristic of the vintage and are the newer versions less prone > to flaring? > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html