Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/12

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

Subject: [Leica] Re:lux Q
From: jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier)
Date: Tue Oct 12 19:24:08 2004
References: <e4.5a7554a0.2e9ddfed@aol.com>

I can't agree with you there. Lenses that may be wonderful for one 
person might be stinkers for another. It all depends on what you like 
to shoot. I have sold several Leica lenses which just did not perform 
well in the conditions I needed them to:

21/3.4SA: Really only an f4 lens as it flares badly wide open. There is 
a fix on the web somewhere which involves disassembling the rear 
optical group and blackening the edges of one of the elements. Bought 
the 21A to replace it (see below).

21/2.8A: Too soft in the corners when wide open and close. Hardly 
surprising I suppose. Switched to 24/2.8A which is much better in this 
regard. Again not surprising considering the reduced coverage.

50/2: Too much veiling glare for my liking. Both the Noctilux and 
SummiluxA normals that followed are fine.

90/2.8 TE : Flared with light coloured tones never mind light sources. 
Both the 90/2.8 Elmarit-M and the 90/2AA that followed are fine.

The people who bought the lenses from me are happy so my habit of 
shooting wide open into light sources may be a bit rarer than this list 
would seem to indicate.

Not Leica bashing mind you! I love my 35/1.4 Asph and the lens which 
replaced the ones I sold.

John Collier


On Oct 12, 2004, at 7:33 PM, Summicron1@aol.com wrote:

> um, you wanna take pictures or admire optical charts?
>
> If you want to take pictures, get any one you can find, Leica made no 
> bad
> glass, with the possible excption of a couple of dogs in the late 
> 1940s.
> Otherwise, they all, repeat ALL, excellent, at worst.
>
> If you wanna get the best optical charts, I can't help you. I take 
> perfecctly
> lovely pictures with a mid-50s summicron, a late-50s or early 60s 35mm
> summaron, and a very early 21mm Super Angulon.
>
> lovely optics, all of them.
>
> charles trentelman
>
>
> In a message dated 10/12/04 1:12:21 PM, lug-request@leica-users.org 
> writes:
>
>
>> Well,
>>
>> The "no pixels" bug (at least not all the time) finally got me. I 
>> must have
>> been hanging around here too much...
>> So, my CL got a bigger brother,? a M4-2 in good shape, and now I'm 
>> thinking
>> of buying a 50 Summilux for it. No Summicron, no Noctilux, sorry.
>>
>> Should I go for the 1st version or the last one of this beauty?
>>
>> Every pro and con is warmly welcomed.
>>
>> Merci,
>> Philippe
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



In reply to: Message from Summicron1 at aol.com (Summicron1@aol.com) ([Leica] Re:lux Q)