Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/19[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Jonathan: What good it is to use a 35/1.4 'Lux Asph on a 6 mp sensor, rather than a cheaper lens? At f/8 or 5.6, probably not much, unless it's what you've got anyway. But at f/1.4 or f/2, the real benefit of the 'Lux Asph is not the ultra-high resolution prized by the KTF8 group (Kodachrome, Tripod and f/8). It's that you get a crisp, contrasy image that looks better than pretty much any other f/1.4 lens out there. Take a wide-open picture with a 35/1.4 Asph and its predecessor, or a 35/1.4 lens by Those Other Manufacturers, and you'll see a difference on a digital sensor. Just as the differences are visible on Tri-X or even faster films, and on a humble Web JPEG. --Peter Klein Seattle, WA >B. D. Colen wrote: > > What would be the point? Quite simply the point would be to use them > > with whatever crop factor is necessary. I can think of allot worse > > things than having the 35 Summilux ASPH morph into what might be the > > world's best 50 mm lens. ;-) Jonathan Borden wrote: >What is the point of wanting a hugely expensive lens like the 35 lux >Asph on a mediocre sensor? > >Gosh, it's not like the many other much more reasonably priced lenses >aren't adequate. Do you really think there is going to be a huge >difference among any reasonably well designed 35mm lens on a 5 or 6 mp >sensor (and a small one at that)?