Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/05

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

Subject: [Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison
From: henningw at (Henning Wulff)
Date: Mon Nov 5 00:11:22 2007
References: <> <>

Sorry; I just looked at the WATE distortion curves again; they're not 
much better than those of the Zeiss 15/2.8. In any case, if you want 
low distortion out of the box, get the CV 15 (or 12). They both have 
less. And combine that with the 21/4.5 Biogon, which has way less.

Or shoot large format; the 35/4.5 Apo-Grandagon has a wider angle of 
view than the 12/5.6 CV and it has no distortion. Same for the 47/5.6 
Super Angulon XL.

The 14's for the SLR's, the zooms that go down to 16 or 17 all have 
serious distortion. The best is probably the 12-24 f/4-5.6 Sigma. It 
has very low distortion, and I don't think I have ever bothered to 
correct the small residual amount.

    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  |[ ]|

Replies: Reply from len-1 at (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison)
Reply from tomschofield at (Tom Schofield) ([Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison)
In reply to: Message from mark at (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison)
Message from len-1 at (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] 16-16-15 lens comparison)