Elmar 50mm lens in Leica and Rangefinders Posted November 8, 2001 I got into Leica several years ago and have done dozens of comparative lens tests vs Nikon, Canon Olympus, Contax ,Tamron SP, Pentax. <p> The Leica screw mounts flare badly wide open , the 3.5 Elmar being unusable backlit. That said, used at 5.6 -8 they have never given a photo I was not pleased with. Old Leica is as good as new Nikon. Newer M lenses ( my newest is a 1990 50mm) are so sharp that they should not be used to photograph relatives concerned with the aging process! They are just great for all else. Handheld Leica don't shake like my SLR's . While the lens chart resolution is not much better ( 108 l/mm best vs 102 l/mm for my 55/ 2.8 Micro nikkor) it is much more noticeable in the final print -perhaps this is focus accuracy but probably vibration is more important. <p> This does not condemn my SLR's - they are easier to use and have much better flash abilities. My 100mm Zuiko yields outdoor images as sharp as my 90 tele elmarit - but not at 1/30th second! This is my quandary - the Leica stuff is better, but harder to use and lacks real tele ability. My cure has been to carry an SLR with a long lens to broaden my travel kit and use the Leica exclusively indoors. This is a weighty solution which may no longer be valid given the difficult nature of travel security post 9/11/01. My trusty OM2 with pistol grip motor drive2 and long lens resembles a terrorist weapon more than a gentle camera while my Leica is still innocuous and quietly non-threatening - which is probably the original intent of the Barnack design.
Elmar 50mm lens
in Leica and Rangefinders
Posted
I got into Leica several years ago and have done dozens of
comparative lens tests vs Nikon, Canon Olympus, Contax ,Tamron SP,
Pentax.
<p>
The Leica screw mounts flare badly wide open , the 3.5 Elmar being
unusable backlit. That said, used at 5.6 -8 they have never given a
photo I was not pleased with. Old Leica is as good as new Nikon.
Newer M lenses ( my newest is a 1990 50mm) are so sharp that they
should not be used to photograph relatives concerned with the aging
process! They are just great for all else. Handheld Leica don't
shake like my SLR's . While the lens chart resolution is not much
better ( 108 l/mm best vs 102 l/mm for my 55/ 2.8 Micro nikkor) it is
much more noticeable in the final print -perhaps this is focus
accuracy but probably vibration is more important.
<p>
This does not condemn my SLR's - they are easier to use and have much
better flash abilities. My 100mm Zuiko yields outdoor images as sharp
as my 90 tele elmarit - but not at 1/30th second! This is my
quandary - the Leica stuff is better, but harder to use and lacks
real tele ability. My cure has been to carry an SLR with a long lens
to broaden my travel kit and use the Leica exclusively indoors. This
is a weighty solution which may no longer be valid given the
difficult nature of travel security post 9/11/01. My trusty OM2 with
pistol grip motor drive2 and long lens resembles a terrorist weapon
more than a gentle camera while my Leica is still innocuous and
quietly non-threatening - which is probably the original intent of
the Barnack design.