Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/06/24

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

Subject: [Leica] Erwin's Summilux writeup
From: henningw at (Henning Wulff)
Date: Thu Jun 24 10:22:24 2004
References: <013001c45985$3b785200$>

At 8:50 PM -0400 6/23/04, B. D. Colen wrote:
>Speaking of subjectivity - Am I the only one to note that not only did
>the recent review of the new Summilux 50 not compare it to the 35
>Summilux ASPH, but it also did not compare it at all to the 75 Summilux.
>I would think that for $2500 this new 50 should at a minimum produce
>images equal to that of the 35 and 75. No?

Not only did he fail to compare it to the 35 and 75's, he also failed 
to compare it to all the other focal lengths.

As most testers have noted at some time or other, you can't 
meaningfully compare lenses with different focal lengths. For your 
own use you might like to do a comparison between two lenses that you 
tend to use interchangeably, but that is different. I, like a lot of 
other people, don't use 35's and 50's interchangeably so the 
comparison would be rather pointless.

If I bought the new 50, I would be very unhappy to discover that it 
produced images equal to my 35 Summilux ASPH, when what I wanted was 
a narrower angle of view.....:-)

As far as image quality is concern, note that Erwin wrote that at all 
apertures that the 50 Summilux and Summicron have in common, the 
Summilux is better.

    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  |[ ]|

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Erwin's Summilux writeup)
Reply from mark at (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Erwin's Summilux write-up)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Epson R-D1)