50mm Serenar vs. 40mm Rokkor

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by john_galloway, Jul 27, 2000.

  1. Negatives (and prints) from my Serenar 50mm 1.8 appear to be sharper than my Rokkor 40mm f2. Is that possible?
  2. Mike Johnson, a photo mag editor, sees things differently. Click here to go there
    I expect that sharpness differences are more a function of hand holding, lens flare, and/or precise focus.
    BTW. We're talking both lenses at say, f/4, as opposed to the Serenar at f/6.3 and the Rokkor at f/2. The Serenar, and almost any other decent normal lens, is twice as sharp at f/6.3 as it is wide open.
  3. John,
    Of course it is possible... it is happening right? Basically, your
    experience is the manifistation of the reason that lens testing based
    on small sample sizes is hard to use to determin which lens is better.


    There may be several variables in your particular equation. Are you
    using the Serenar lens on a cannon RF body? If so, there may be a
    disparity between the accuracy of your rangefinders. Another thing
    that may give the "illusion" of more clarity and sharpness is the
    50mm lens will give a 20% greater magnification over the 40mm,
    requireing less enlargment to see the same image.


    Basically, use the lens that gives you the best results. enjoy them
    and ignore reports that say you shouldn't be enjoying any particular
    lens. The only thing that matters is YOUR pictures.


  4. Have you shined a flashlight into the Rokkor to check for any fogging
    or fungus? Mine that came with a CLE is one of the sharpest lenses
    I've ever used, at least as good as my 50mm Summicron Leica lens. The
    images just pop off the page, and very fine detail is rendered even
    in lower contrast lighting situations. Either you got a bad sample
    of the Rokkor, or the best Canon Serenar ever made.

Share This Page