Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Has anyone compared the lens formula for these two with the two old SuperAngulons ? I get the impression that some of these "new" rangefinder lenses are the older formula lenses with computer recomputation, more modern glass and multi-coating. I am sure modern production technology may help as well. As good as the newer Leica 21s have been they do not alway seem to produce an image with the same "character" as the SuperAngulons do. The SuperAngulons were true short focus lenses where the newer 21s are retrofocus or reverse-telephoto. Both have distinctive "signatures". ================================================================== Thank you very much for the information on the CV glass. I particularly find useful the fact that the 21/4 is superior to the 21/2.8 non-aspheric. If I were to have bought one I more than likely would have chosen the faster lens. More than one person has told me they do not like the Nokton for various reasons. I won't be buying it. Some also say that the glass flares and other that it doesn't. I tend to believe that if it happens to one it could happen to all. From what I am hearing the CV lens is not as good as Leica but still a good value for the money. I have had recommendations for the 50/2.0 Heliar and the APO 90. Over the weekend I will decide which of these two I would like to have. Jack _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information --------------------------------- Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.