Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 08:44 PM 8/20/06 -0400, Ric Carter wrote: >Anyway, what are your ideas on the relative virtues of each of these? >Are there advantages to each? Is there a time to use one over the other? Erwin Puts is the honest master of optical analysis of Leitz and Leica lenses: Erwin is a friend of mine of many years and is a former member of this esteemed body. He will tell you that the later the lens, the better it is, and, for the most part, he is absolutely correct. I will be the iconoclast, and I will stick with the Summitar. I love that lens, and I have taken satisfying (I started to say "great" but then some rebellious soul in our number would start demanding that I produce those photos -- I am moving, a SLOW and AGONIZING move, mind you, and I have had three scanners die on me in a row, so I have nothing to show to you guys save by mail, and even then, it would be a matter of six or eight months until my new darkroom is up and operating). I find the Summitar results really great. The best of the lot in my estimation, though, is the DR (dual-range) or NF (near-focus) 2/5cm Summicron, a second-generation version, with close-focus eyeglasses. Get one, and enjoy, either a 2/5cm Summitar or a 2/5cm Summicron DR. Either one will test YOUR limits. You will never test the limits of the lens, I suspect, unless you are Ted Grant, that Immortal Soul of Eternal Photography. Marc msmall@aya.yale.edu Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!