Extensive Leica Suumilux-C test

[Antoine Fabi]

Thanks Carlo for sharing!

Well written and informative.

As soon as you receive your set, please post images!

Antoine

[Kyle Broom]

What we've got here is failure. To communicate.

[Pawel Achtel]

Carlo, That's fantastic test. Thank you very much for sharing!

BTW, have you done similar tests for other lenses? I'd be very interested if you evaluated Master Primes.

[Michael Lindsay]

Hi Carlo

To reiterate it was great for you to share... I am particlarly motivaed by the fact I am trying to acquire a set. I will be testing as soon as I can but in the mean time I'd love to know more about their performance between T2 and wide open? Did you shoot any of the resalution charts wide open? Or even at T2?

Even just a quick coment about how they compared against the UP's at T2?

thank you.

Michael

[Blair S. Paulsen]

FWIW I have been a part of some testing programs myself and the Leica C lenses are the best I have ever seen.

As Ketch noted, many testers have given the Leica C primes very high marks on pretty much every critical metric - including resolution.

No offense, but it does make one wonder why your results were so different.

Cheers - #19

[Josh Beadle]

. . . No offense, but it does make one wonder why your results were so different.
Cheers - #19

"I would say, technically, optically, and mechanically, they beat the pants off of just about any other set of primes out there. …Except for the Zeiss Master Primes."

http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2...leicasummilux/

[Carlo Rho]

@Pawel
Sorry but we never did the complete test of a Master Prime set, we use the 50mm many time as reference. We're planning an S5 test next month, hopefully we'll do a MasterPrime / Cooke S5 test side by side.

@ Michael
I'm looking through the orginal footage, I know we've shoot from T1.3 to T22 I'll send you something asap.

@Blair Intresting words, please provide some detail and some image so we can speak about it.

"I would say, technically, optically, and mechanically, they beat the pants off of just about any other set of primes out there. …Except for the Zeiss Master Primes."

http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2...leicasummilux/

I wonder where our article say something far from Duclos?

[Josh Beadle]

Yes please, those who have expressed doubt or criticism on Carlo's test please submit their own work for comparison. I am still very much a newbie at reading and understanding tests so the more variety I am exposed to the better.

That said . . . I see no use in denigrating any test since if you can't gain any insight from an extensive test like Carlo has provide you are a fuckin idiot who has shut down the learning portion of your brain and are just looking for opinions that reconfirm what you already believe.

[Pawel Achtel]

Thanks Carlo,

One interesting aspect of comparison would be to compare a measurement of MTF50 or, MTF at 50% Nyquist at fully opened. Such comparison would give great insight to micro-contrast at very small detail. Both of those you can get through Imatest.

It is good to see some solid and well-documented tests among the sea of subjective opinions. As they say: the facts speak for themselves.. yet, I have never expected that physics could be so emotional. I had similar reception of skeptics after publishing MTF graphs for underwater optics.

[Michael Lindsay]

@ Michael
I'm looking through the orginal footage, I know we've shoot from T1.3 to T22 I'll send you something asap.

Thank you!

M