Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Go look in the archives for Tom A's 35mm synopsis he posted on the LUG a few weeks ago. It's short to the point and should easily give you enough info to sell you on the 35mm you want. If you read it and still have further questions...call NASA and have them help you out ;) but their answers most likely won't help your (our) photos !! JS - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Ted Grant Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:41 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: Re: [Leica] Voightlander lenses Richard F. Man asked: > Ted, does it really give you 1.2? Dante conjectures that due to the > high number of internal surfaces, the light transmission may be less > than it claims? Also, how does it compare to the Summilux ASPH? (at > 1.4 and above :-)< Hi Richard, I never thought it was anything else but f.1.2 and never fiddled with a meter to check it out to be anything else but f 1.2. I put it on the M7 and started shooting away. You know KISS ;-) Story of my life. :-) >>>Also, how does it compare to the Summilux ASPH? (at 1.4 and above >>>:-)< Sorry I can't be of any help as I don't test things like that, as I'm usually too busy shooting. However, having had lots of Sandy Carter's ASPH 35 1.4 negs and prints around here I'd say the C/V f1.2 35mm, mine anyway, has cut negs as good as her ASPH 35 1.4. Now that's an eyeball comparison and not the least bit technical, but damn mine sure look pretty good. ted - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html