I didn\'t like that the E60 was not very sharp at reasonably close range and wide open. However wide open sharpness really wasn\'t a problem at greater distances. Bokeh was certainly quite nice, vignetting about as expected. Edge sharpness is irrelevant to me so I didn\'t even test for that. I don\'t doubt my conclusions about close range sharpness as I was initially surprised with what I was seeing so I tried many ways to prove I was wrong, swapped focusing screens, shot various subjects etc.
I tested the lenses in the exact manner that I would ultimately use them, which is shooting cars (which is my day job), often in difficult conditions such as at night. The resulting images where (as I\'d expected) very similar to the R 50/2 E55. However as the lens didn\'t really deliver wide open, I didn\'t see any advantage in buying it. The price was right. I should have bought it and resold it later. I would have made a killing.
By the way, there is a reasonable amount of info about it on the web, specifically Erwin Puts\' reviews, originally on the Leica site and then on his own. At the time, approx 5 years ago, there was less info and samples on the web then there are now. At the end of the day it doesn\'t matter much what other people think about a lens, only how it actually performs (in my own circumstances) so this is why I borrow and test any expensive lens that I intend to buy. The lens was a loaner. I\'m not a big fan of spending lots of money only to find the item doesn\'t deliver the goods.
Ultimately that was one of the reasons for my dissapointment in that I did hope, more than expect, it to perform a bit better than it did in my tests.
I didn\'t like that the E60 was not very sharp at reasonably close range and wide open. However wide open sharpness really wasn\'t a problem at greater distances. Bokeh was certainly quite nice, vignetting about as expected. Edge sharpness is irrelevant to me so I didn\'t even test for that. I don\'t doubt my conclusions about close range sharpness so I tried many ways to prove I was wrong.
I tested the lenses in the exact manner that I would ultimately use them, which is shooting cars (which is my day job), often in difficult conditions such as at night. The resulting images where (as I\'d expected) very similar to the R 50/2 E55. However as the lens didn\'t really deliver wide open, I didn\'t see any advantage in buying it. The price was right. I should have bought it and resold it later. I would have made a killing.
By the way, there is a reasonable amount of info about it on the web, specifically Erwin Puts\' reviews, originally on the Leica site and then on his own. At the time, approx 5 years ago, there was less info and samples on the web then there are now. At the end of the day it doesn\'t matter much what other people think about a lens, only how it actually performs (in my own circumstances) so this is why I borrow and test any expensive lens that I intend to buy. The lens was a loaner. I\'m not a big fan of spending lots of money only to find the item doesn\'t deliver the goods.
Ultimately that was one of the reasons for my dissapointment in that I did hope, more than expect, it to perform a bit better than it did in my tests.
JJ
Jan 04, 2012 at 03:14 AM
Previous versions of JohnJ's message #10215567 « What's your biggest dissapointment (lens)? »
