Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thank you Daniel D. On Jan 6, 2006, at 3:17 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote: > I don't know if I would say absolutely better. I prefer the Jupiter at > f2.0 - 4.0. The Summitar can have some wild bokeh (and I never thought > I was sensitve for bokeh). The Jupiter is smooth like a Zeiss Sonnar. > > If you run across one close, it won't cost you much to try. I see them > going for 25 - 30 dollars at times. > > The Elmar is hard to beat. Its only real problem is difficult lighting > situations causing flare. But if it doesn't flare, I like it at all > stops. This one was wide-open. It only gets better. > > Daniel > > On 1/6/06, David Cochran <cochranpr@mac.com> wrote: >> Interesting how grain is different on both shots. >> >> Jupiter better than Summitar? I ask because I have a Summitar and >> wonder about the Jupiter. >> >> Peace >> >> david >> >> On Jan 6, 2006, at 3:04 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote: >> >>> These are just two shots I ran off to compare the Summitar and Elmar >>> that I have for the IIIf. I already know that the Jupiter-8 is a >>> top-class lens. I ran across a Summitar for a reasonable price (a tad >>> over 100 USD) that was in near perfect condition, so I couldn't >>> resist. >>> >>> Summitar >>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/iiif/05v52_0001 >>> >>> Elmar >>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/iiif/05v52_0002 >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information