Zeiss vs Leitz

[Huck Finn]

As we await the anticipated Zeiss-Ikon & rumored Zeiss lenses to accompany it, I thought that this article might make for interesting reading for anyone trying to decide which lenses to put on their new camera.

www.photo.net/bboard/big-image?bboard_upload_id=18332484

 

[denishr]

Looks like I'll have to repolish and recoat my "damaged" Summicron, after all

 

[peter_n]

I have the current Elmar-M f2.8, a lens that gets little respect. But it is really good about 1/2 or a full stop down from open. Not as painfully sharp as the Summicron, which is unkind to people, but way more than sharp enough for most circumstances. It has a slightly warmer color rendition than the Summicron too. I like it!

 

[Huck Finn]

I almost forgot about this other article that I had also saved on the same subject:

www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-17.shtml

 

[peter_n]

That was interesting to me 'cos they talk about the Elmar-M as a Tessar and leaning to warmth in reproduction. My experience too.

 

[Oldprof]

Zeiss versus Leitz lenses, Leica versus Contax cameras ... I think that was the big debate of 1938.

 

[peter_n]

Yeah now it's the same old thing but more boring: digital Canon versus digital Nikon

 

[Doug]

Thanks, Huck; interesting reads. I guess I should dig out some of my old enlargements to look for this kind of distinction. I was oblivious to it back then, and don't now have the quality of output that might show it.