18mm or 16/18/21mm Tri Elmar?

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Frank thanks for visiting my site and for your feedback. In terms of quality of the older lenses (the pre-mid 1960's which I have) the differences I've found are that they're more prone to flaring and the colours are definitely more muted, in some cases sort of slightly washed out, especially when shooting in brighter light. I guess this is due to the lens coatings or lack thereof. With the exception of the VISO of course, all handle with great ease and exceptionally well.

 

Over time I've added the newer ASPH lenses to the arsenal, there's no question they deliver overall better results and quality.

 

Having said that, here are 2 pics: #1 taken with a 1954 50mm f2 Summicron & #2 taken with the latest 28mm f2 Summicron ASPH, can you really see a huge difference?

 

Both shots are excellent....actually the 50mm f2 summicron photo seems to have warmer colour tones, but I guess that can be due to or could be easily corrected by Photoshop. Your comments about flare and colour depth are what I am starting to notice also.

 

I have the 21mm super angulon and have noticed "some photos" with washed out colours taken in very bright sunlight...whereas my more recent tri elmar (28 / 35 / 50mm) and 75mm Summilux show this less yet under the same light conditions.

 

In my view this issue seems to be with lenses prior to about 1980 ....does anyone know if Leica changed their lens coatings during the 1975 to 1980 period?

[michali]

The difference is that the cigar shows you are a bit slow in changing lenses... thank god it's a bayonet... if you were using a screw mount there would be no cigar left.

 

Why waste a great cigar on some arbitrary pictures & lens comparisons, so I smoked most of it!