CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Contax Makro vs Leica Macro



I heard Macro lenses of Leica are superior to those of Contax. Is that true?
Especially 100mm Macro of Leica is Apo-Macro whereas Makro of Contax is just 100mm Makro.
Has anyone used both of lenses?
Please compare these lens in terms of overall performance, color redintion and sharpness.


About 12 years ago I decided to buy me a Contax Equipment and not a Leica, and the reason why was the 2.8/100 Macro-Planar in comparison to the Leica.
Both optics are outstanding macro lenses. A comparision in practice is more or less senseless, you will never reach 100 % of the theoretical performance of this lenses.
I decided to buy a Contax because the Makro-Planar is able to focus from infinity to 1:1 without mounting any tube or close-up lens. And the other reason was the RTS III with the vacuum film back ...

And forget the term "Apo": There is no industrial standard definition, whether a manufacturer is allowed to use or not to use the prefix "apo" in the description of a lens. There are a lot of Zeiss lenses without "Apo" which perform much better than so called XYZ Apos.



Well-Known Member
There are MTF curves (by Erwin Puts) published for LEICA APO-Macro in the Leica Pocket Guide 7th Ed. (Lindemanns Buchhandlung german Edition, I paid CHF 48 at Foto Baeren in Zurich). Optimal aperture is f/5.6. in english =>
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
LeicaPocket7thEd USD $35.95
Both german photo magazines rate the Leica R Apo-Elmarit-R slightly better.



I would trust MTF data published from Zeiss more than data published by a journalist who has by far not the knowledge than the lens designers from Zeiss.