Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Leica elmarit 24 vs tamron
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:00 pm    Post subject: Leica elmarit 24 vs tamron Reply with quote
Today we had sun and I try the elmarit 24 2.8 337XX.
I wake-up my tamron 17-50 who sleep in my bag for 6 month now.
This leica must be quite old as it doesn't have electronic contact.
I expected better border performance on a 400D crop dslr.

tamron vs leica F5.6 , wb daylight


center


middle


border


leica F5.6 vs F11, not better



Here I put also my contax 25 ae who is not know for good border
leica 24 - contax 25 - tamron 17-50


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm surprised to see that.
I wouldn't expect every Leica lens to be magnificent in every area, but that one's actually quite crap in some bits.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, it would not be a big surprise on a 5D, but on a 400d? Shocked

Maybe you've find a Leica lemon.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Many thanks Poilu, to make it clear what I always say Lens is CARL ZEISS Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's strange. I do not know this Leica lens, but perhaps there is even something wrong with your copy... Sad


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Leica myth is strong!
Here is maybe some explanation:

Leica wrote:

The lens dates from 1974, which is reflected in the relative performance. At full aperture overall contrast is medium high and definition of fine detail in the centre portion of the image is excellent.
The outer zones reproduce textural details with some softness

The LEICA ELMARIT-R 24mm f/2.8 has a long history.
In the period of the cooperation with Minolta this lens was adopted from a Minolta design and packaged in a Leitz mount.
The glass elements were from Minolta and other manufacturers.
In a later stage Minolta stopped producing the lens and Leitz had to adapt the lens design to the use of different glass types from different glass manufacturers.





PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting data, poilu. Thanks!


PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Distagons are just the best wide angles ever made for 35mm reflex photography. With the only exception of the Distagon 18mm (which, however, comes close to the Zuiko and performs better than the Leica 19).

The Leica 24mm is a Minolta lens rebadged. And it shows.
Even Tamron is better.

I don't know why Leica, who is king until 35mm focal lenght, approved such a painful 24mm lens in their catalogue. This, together with the not exciting performance of the Leica 19mm (shown in test to be inferior to Zuiko, Distagon and Pentax), and the fact that they brokered Zeiss and Angenieux to build wide angle lenses for them, makes me think that for some obscure reason, their designers can not come up with a superwide lens that is up to the Leica standard of excellence.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1