[Leica] Re:What's the Best All-Around 50?

[jsmith342 at cox.net (Jeffery Smith)]

I had decided that I would never be able to afford a new 50/1.4 asph. And
they are too new to find used unless someone gets divorced and is
liquidating his assets. Tom A. told me that it was a super lens. But at that
price? 

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA
http://www.400tx.com




-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Don Dory
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 8:56 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re:What's the Best All-Around 50?


Jeffery,
The 50 ASPH will in the right circumstances have wierd bokeh.  Normally, it
just is sharper, more contrast, and better edges.  If you want lower
contrast, pull the film.  Yes, it is the Summilux 1.4.

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 5/10/06, Jeffery Smith <jsmith342@cox.net> wrote:
>
> DOW! I have a 50's collapsible 50/2 Summicron, and the latest version. 
> Is the bokeh the difference? Asph seems to lead to funky bokeh, but 
> even the current version is non-asph, isn't it?
>
> That also explains why I play with myself so much.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> http://www.400tx.com
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of 
> Christopher Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:08 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: [Leica] Re:What's the Best All-Around 50?
>
>
> Early 70's 50/2 Summicron, still considered the best 50mm by many. 
> Anything else and you're playing with yourself.
>
> And you should already have one I'm guessing.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeffery Smith" Subject: [Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?
>
>
> > Now, this  isn't a "What should I buy?" question because I have 
> > nearly all of them already. And the Noctilux 50/1.0 isn't the right 
> > answer because it is really designed to be used under limited light 
> > and it is just too
> darned
> > big, expensive, and heavy to be a "best" of all worlds. Take into
> > account:
> >
> > Sharpness (a subjective perception)
> > Contrast
> > Bokeh
> > Easy of use (yeah, I guess that means weight and size) Contrast 
> > Versatility Affordability (keep in mind that I'm talking to LUGers 
> > who could afford
> the
> > body...they have enough to buy this lens, but who spend $3,800 if 
> > you can buy the best all-around 50 for less?) Use with today's 
> > films, not classic films Intangibles
> >
> > I have a pretty good idea of what most folks would say, but wondered 
> > if I
> am
> > right. If the Department of Homeland Security dictated that a 
> > photographer could have only one lens, a 50 (so you couldn't take 
> > pictures of places
> you
> > planned to attack), what would it be? Oh, and it has to be Leica.
> >
> > Jeffery Smith
> > New Orleans, LA
> > http://www.400tx.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information