Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/16

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

Subject: [Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-)
From: don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory)
Date: Tue Aug 16 17:39:06 2005
References: <005301c5a1c5$12c11480$2b7f4c51@desktop> <a2f8f4470508151142713edd52@mail.gmail.com> <9b678e0508151812d22877c@mail.gmail.com> <a2f8f44705081603107e52de66@mail.gmail.com> <ceb1a565050816071547e76ed1@mail.gmail.com>

Mark,
I have had several of my Leitz 50's from the fifties gone over at
Focal Point.  Yes, the performance improved quite a bit, but for flare
reduction you just are not going to beat a triplet design with a
double Gauss and mono coating.

I wouldn't trade my very early Summicron or Summicron DR for anything,
but it you are traveling to dusty, impoverished Africa, especially to
a part that is being victimized by its ruler, I would not take a $500
lens.  Now, a fifty dollar Sonnar knock off, you bet.  That was why I
suggested the Jupiter 3 to Daniel

Don
don.dory@gmail.com

On 8/16/05, Mark Langer <langeratcarleton@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don, a lot of 50s vintage Leica lenses that suffer from flare can be
> remarkably improved, even if they look clean, by having them
> professionally cleaned and collimated.  I've had lots of dud Summars
> but until I bought one that Sherry had worked her magic on, I had no
> idea what this lens could do.  Similarly, a Summitar cleaned by
> Reinhold Mueller was transformed.  The most dramatic improvement that
> I've seen in a lens was a prewar f2  50mm collapsible Sonnar that
> looked as clean as a whistle, but was a terrible performer.  I sent it
> off to Henry Scherer, and it was transformed.  You may have a similar
> experience with some 50s lenses if you send them off to be properly
> cleaned.
> 
> The best bang for the buck still is a late Jupiter 3, which is just a
> fraction of the price of the Japanese copies of it, including the
> Canon 50/1.5 or the Simlar 50/1.5.  But the Jupiter doesn't have that
> massive chrome and brass construction that the Japanese lenses have.
> On the other hand, the Jupiter balances far better on a screwmount or
> M Leica body than the heavier Japanese lenses, which make a Leica a
> bit tippy when you handle it.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from geebee at geebeephoto.com (GeeBee) ([Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-))
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-))
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-))
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-))
Message from langeratcarleton at gmail.com (Mark Langer) ([Leica] OH NO!.. Alastair!...I did it again :-))