Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's what I think Erwin said. Maybe its true. (that a Summilux ASPH had less flare than the 50mm Summicron ASPH) He also I think says that in general a smaller outer lens to air element is less prone to flare. Which I'm sure is basic optics 101. And goes on in length about the huge demands an increase in speed puts upon the poor optical designer (by the marketing department no doubt). I'm comforted by the smallest outer optical element possible. With no filter on it if possible. And simple compact lens designs from tried and true concepts like Tessars and Planars. And Biogons not that I own one. And wish I was shooting rangefinders as that would put less limits on how slow a lens I can practically use. - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > From: John McMaster <john at chiaroscuro.co.nz> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:37:55 +1200 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] The world is awash with M9....... > > I thought the 50mm Summilux asph was meant to flare less than the 50mm > Summicron? > > john > > -----Original Message----- > > And if you were rolling in dough you'd get the 1.4. Or whatever the high > end > f stop was. So you paid extra for a bloated heavy more flare prone optic. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information