Can someone please forward me Puts' newsleter where he explains why elmar 50 is the ideal lens for M7.

Best regards,

-- Boris BRECELJ (boris@brecelj-op.si), April 13, 2002

Answers

I don't know if your interested why I think the Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8 is the best Leica lens, period(!), but here goes:

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), April 13, 2002.

Whoops, I almost forgot: Leitz M6, Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8, Leica UVa, Ilford XP2

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), April 13, 2002.

Glenn, that's beautiful (albeit slightly soft on the eye - a fault? not sure). Thanks for posting something that I really enjoyed seeing...maybe not all picture postings should be banned...

-- Steve Jones (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), April 13, 2002.

I reckon if you softened the sharp hair at the top left of the frame it would be perfect. (Sorry, I know you didn't want any advice - I'm just enthusiastic about the image.)

-- Steve Jones (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), April 13, 2002.

Very good photo,i feel the photographer made it not the lense.

-- Allen Herbert (allen1@btinternet.com), April 13, 2002.

I used to use the Elmar but finally got rid of it because (1) strong flare when shooting into the sun (2) isn't as weather-proof (ie in light rain) and (3) not as sharp as the Summicron.

IMO the only things the Elmar have going for it is retro looks and compactness, although the latter isn't much of an advantage if you use the Summicron without a hood (or rubber hood which folds back over the lens).

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), April 13, 2002.

I know my Elmar-M is not as sharp as my Summicron, at least to my eye. However, the Elmar-M has the smoothest focusing mechanism on any lens I've ever owned; and it was like that right out of the box. It's a pleasure to use. Maybe I just happened to get a good one.

Dennis

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), April 13, 2002.

The reason that the 50/2.8 is the best is that Leica probably have a warehouse full and need to shift them. How better? Read Erwin Puts' own assessment of 50 lenses. The 50/2.8 comes third. It is not that it is no good - it just isn't as good as the other two.

-- wayne murphy (wmurphy@powerup.com.au), April 14, 2002.

I agree with the point about the smooth focussing ring. I had a chrome 'cron, and never could get rid of a slight stickiness - but my Elmar is as smooth as a baby's bottom.

At my level of competence, the difference in quality between the two is immaterial. I just wish the Elmar was as compact as the original Elmar from the 30's!

-- Paul Hart (paulhart@blueyonder.co.uk), April 14, 2002.

But to get it that compact, it has a little iris control tab right in front. If you have a filter on, you have to take it off just to adjust the aperture.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), April 14, 2002.

Just what makes this lens so special, especially as compared to the 50 'cron? I've not heard anyone explain that it is sharper, contrastier, or anything like that, nor does it seem much smaller (with hood attached). So what's to like? Just curious, since I have never handled one.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), April 15, 2002.

BEAUTIFUL

-- Richard Brown (rubyvalentine@earthlink.net), April 18, 2002.