Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/09/24

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

Subject: [Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50
From: alcedo at verizon.net (Jan Decher)
Date: Wed Sep 24 19:45:04 2008

Lluis et al. 

I do have a weakness for collapsible lenses (and "pancake" SLR lenses like 
the C/Y 2.8/45 mm Tessar).  Never had a problem remembering to pull out a 
collapsible lens before shooting. 

I also figured out how to use the LUG Gallery and uploaded four Sensia 
Slides taken with M6, 3.5/50 Elmar and 4/135mm Elmar  scanned on my Epson 
3200. Minor croppinf in PSE to get rid of fuzzy Fujichrome cardboard mount 
edges and some de-spotting.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/bigon07/

So far I am pretty happy with the 3.5/50 Elmar's performance.  Will do a 
side by side comparison of 3.5/50 Elmar and 2.0/50 Summicron on tripod later 
this week. 
Jan


Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:17:32 +0200
From: Lluis Ripoll <luisripoll@telefonica.net>
Hi Jan,
I don't know how it performs your Elmar, I can talk about the very old  
one LTM, is a very good lens giving very nice lights and contrasted  
light situations, I know the latest Elmar 2,8/50 this is for me an  
excellent lens you can use in extremely contrasted situations and also  
on situations you want to have rich grey tones. I have also a  
Summicron Collapsible, is a great lens, it give a very special B&W  
with absolutely nice smooth tones, on the point of vue of flare it is  
more resistant than the Elmar.
Both lenses are beautiful to enjoy.
I've said my opinion talking about B&W, I don't know in color.
Hoping you show your pictures and share our opinions
Saludos cordiales
Lluis

Replies: Reply from jhnichols at bellsouth.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50)
Reply from len-001 at verizon.net (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50)
Reply from luisripoll at telefonica.net (Lluis Ripoll) ([Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50)