Being an eyeglass wearer I recently came into the possession of a 0.58 M6TTL. I plan to procure a 35 mm ASPH lens for this body and I am weighing the strengths of the Lux ASPH and Cron ASPH. An aspect of lens performance which I have not been able to fully evaluate is the curvilinear distortion levels of these two lenses. Erwin's book states that the Cron has distortion visible only in the far corners whereas the Lux has distortion generally visible. I like architecture, would the Lux give me bowed walls?

-- Doug from Tumwater (dbaker9128@aol.com), March 19, 2002

Answers

I am no professional when it comes to technical stuff such as "curvilinear" distortion, but I can tell you that the distortion control on the Lux Asph is not apparent through general examination of slides (assuming that the angle is perfectly hotizontal) and prints. Like any lens that is tilted, distortion is increased, but you probably already know that.

Compared to other main brand competing outfits from Canon and say Nikon, I would say that distortion control is better with the Leica lens, but you can never beat a Tilt/Shift lens for perspective distortion control. And if you are VERY serious about this, you may want to try the R system with the 35mm lens designed for architechture. The M system was never designed for architectual photography, but is well corrected in distortion as so much work goes into perfecting there lenses.

But to answer your question, without any experience with the Cron-----tests that I have read suggest better control with the Cron. But I would think that it would be minimally and not really noticeably better. With a fast f/1.4 lens, distortion control isn't the first priority in lens design. Compromises must be made. Sometimes distortion is compromised ala Nikkon AIS 35mm f/1.4 which suffers terribly.

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

"but I can tell you that the distortion control on the Lux Asph is not apparent through general examination of slides (assuming that the angle is perfectly hotizontal) and prints"

i meant that i cannot see any distortion. Sorry :0

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

Kristian. You are confusing apparent perspective "distortion", which occurs when any wide angle lens is tilted (eg., upward, to photograph a tall building) with curvilinear distortion, which is an aberration that needs to be corrected by the lens designer. Barrel distortion is more prevalent in the 35/1.4 Slux and 50/1.4 Slux than the corresponding Scrons. Similarly, the 28/2 Scron has a little more distortion than the 28/2.8 Elmarit. However, the faster lenses are still suitable for architectural subjects, unless you are particularly sensitive to very small amounts of distortion visible at the edges og the field.

Leica M lenses are well suited for architectural photography, which I have been doing for years with wide angle M lenses. The only thing you miss with the M system is a shift lens, which facilitates architectural photography by allowing you to photograph a tall structure without converging verticals (this lens has other uses too). For this purpose, the Canon 24/3.5 TS (tilt-shift) EF-L lens with any el-cheapo Canon EOS body is a good choice.

Doug. IMO, the 35/1.4 Slux (ASPH) is a perfectly good lens for architecture. I am not particularly sensitive to very small degrees of curvature at the edge of the field. Other people may find this more objectionable.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), March 19, 2002.

Thanks much to both of you. I do like the Lux very much.......

-- Doug from Tumwater (dbaker9128@aol.com), March 20, 2002.