pedro_lastra

Chasseur gives it 5 stars for performance. They only complain about

the price and lack of a tripod mount. I own the 180 Apo Telyt, which

got 4 stars, and the performance is great. I dislike the lack of

tripod mount and long close focusing distance, 2.5 meters for the

Telyt.

I am lucky enough to own the older 10x and highly recommend it.

Schneider is a company you can trust either way. I own a small peak

22x and was surprised to be able to discern more detail with the

Schneider 10x. The Schneider is also excellent out to the edges. The

only gripe is the coverage, the 10x covers a slide along the 24mm

side only.

Leica M6 and the latest 50 Summicron. This combo is as competent as

any 35mm shooter out there.

All the current summicrons, all the current elmarits,the 75mm

summilux and the 135 apo. Up to 11/14, and all things being equal, it

is hard to see any difference in resolution between current leica

lenses of the same focal length. To see a difference, you need a slow

film and a tripod. Since most Leica M users, including me, do not use

a tripod, the difference is irrelevant.

I recommend you hold on to the elmarit. I own the elmarit, the 75 lux

and the 90 apo and all are excellent lenses. For portrait work, I

find the apo much too contrasty and sharp. If you want a lens for low

light work, the extra stop of the lux is probably the answer.

Consider that even wide open, the lux will give you an excellent

8X10.Wide open, portraits with the lux have a rich tonality and the

backgrounds totally disappear.

The apo beats the lux at F2, after that and using a 40x Zeiss

microspcope, I can not discern any resolution advantage to either

lens. On the other hand, the elmarit has some of the most impressive

out of focus rendition, the apo's bokeh is not as well behaved. The

lux, has a creaminess and roundness which I also like. In short, for

portraits the elmarit, for landscape with slow high res. films the

apo, for low light work and portraits with no DOF the lux.

I love the 75mm and find its performance to be outstanding. While

very sharp, this lens has incredibly clean out of focus areas. The

90mm APO is a tad smaller, but I do not believe there is a

significant difference in handling between the two lenses. I also

believe they are both about as sharp at F2.8 and beyond. At F2, the

90mm APO is a tad sharper, but the summilux can give you solid

results at both F1.4 and F2. For portraits, I find the APO too

contrasty and find the summilux to have smoother gradation and better

backgrounds. Please keep in mind both these lenses, and the latest 90

elmarit, are all outstanding. The differences are subtle.

Unfortunately, it depends on your subject. As far as resolution, the

summicron is superior, by a slight margin at f2 and f2.8, to the

summilux. After f4 you would need to magnify over 22x to notice. Of

course, if you need to shoot indoors with no flash, the summilux is

faster and renders out of focus areas (bokeh) beautifully. I believe

the out of focus rendition of the summilux is finer than that of the

summicron.

Has any one looked at the ability of Leica lenses to keep out of focus highlights orderly and compact. After examining many slides shot thru good Canon, Nikon and Leica glass, I have noticed a consistent difference in the way out of focus highlights are rendered. My Canon L and Nikon pro-zooms seem to magnify and distort out of focus highlights to the detriment of in focus picture elements. Has any one else observed this?

Just before christmas I took the plunge and bought a Canon 300mm f2.8 IS. Needless to say, never before had I spent even close to 5k on any lens. Unfortunately for my savings, lately I have become addicted to bird photography and needed a lens to reach 600mm and not have to worry about always shooting at high speeds or lugging my big and heavy Gitzo tripod and ball head. The new lens allows me to get very sharp pictures using a Gitzo Monopod at reasonably low speeds. At 300mm I can regularly shoot down to 1/30 and get superb results. My old 300mm lens required at least 1/200 for consistent results of the monopod. With the 2X converter, the differences are more startling. I can safely shoot down to 1/90 and the sharpness by f8.0 defies belief. The old lens never got this sharp and even on a tripod speeds of 1/90 and below were risky (mirror slap perhaps?). In short, the new lens brings performance to a level unatainable before. Of course, buying a good tripod and head is cheaper than IS technology. But who can put a price on the convenience and flexibility of using a 600mm of a monopod. Besides, now that I do not have to deal with the weight of a tripod, I can bring more film and other equipment along.