New Super Elmar 18mm f3.8-ASPH

[Richard Marks]

SR1, the only thing Leica that is unquestionable is the quality of the lenses in terms of resolution, especially the new Aspheric lenses. So much so that many like the character of the older lenses better.

Leica posts their test results. You can see the Noctilux plots, compare to Summilux plots, and tell that the Nocti is a compromise. Erwin Puts has thorough discussions that go beyond just the charts. The Popular Photography Leica lens tests also shows the lenses to be superb. Leica M and R lens performance is better than either Canon or Nikon resulting in many using R lenses on Canon and Nikon. Only Zeiss is currently matching Leica, although the CV lenses are hard to match in value.

What lenses and 12 mp camera are you using that leads you to make these statements? Are you using a 21/24 mp DSLR with the best available lenses and have been disappointed?

I do want a FF M9 with 24 mp. I will put in my order for the new 18mm this week.

Presumably lens resolution becomes limitting when the pixel density on the sensor is higher then the number of line pairs per cm that the lens can resolve.
Just for the sake of argument let us assume a full frame sensor 2.5x3.5cm has 10 mega pixel total count, this equates to 1143000 pixels per square cm. If the distribution of pixels is uniform, in any direction the total number of pixels per cm becomes 1069. Assuming 5 pixels is the minimum to resolve a line pair, this would give our sensor the ability to resove around 200 line pairs per cm. So theoretically sensors can already out resolve lenses numerically speeking. Clearly other factors must be present, noise from neighbouring pixels, ability of screens / the eye to see the resolved line pairs. So on this basis pixel count is already 'out performing lenses'.

Can some one more knowledgeable improve on these humble guestimates.

Richard