Re: ASPH vs Aspheric

[Fred Ward <fward@erols.com>]

It is not often that I feel compelled to stop what I'm doing and reply 
to a thread here. 

But the apparent desperate desire to own the biggest and best at any 
cost and with scant regard for an end use does bother me a bit. I am not 
referring to the current 35mm ASPH question but to the APO nonsense and 
some of the other esoteric questions of late. 

What is the end mission of camera and lens ownership? I feel in the 
minority here of those who think it is to make pictures. Owning or 
carressing the best ever made is certainly a nice thought, but is that 
what we are dealing with daily?

I own and use a 24mm aspheric f/1.4 Canon lens for SLRs. It is 
sensational. And professionally I have had great success with it. Soon 
after buying it I found myself to be the first American journalist 
allowed into Tibet since the Chinese took over (I was there in the fall 
of 1979; the article ran in Jan 1980). I made pictures for my National 
Geographic article on Tibet inside the country's most sacred monastery, 
shooting Ektachrome 400 at 1/15 at 1.4, wide open, hand held. By 
candlelight. There was no other way to get the images, one of which ran 
across a page in NGS. 

OK, great use of a great lens. But how many of us need that speed and 
quality? On my M-Leicas I use a 35mm Summicron, and at f/2 it is tiny 
and wonderful in every way. It will serve 99.9% of the people on this 
list perfectly well for 99.9% of their photographic work. How much are 
you willing to pay for 1 f/stop to get a bigger, much more expensive 
lens that is only marginally better at the stops where most pictures are 
made? 

And with that thought in mind, I have to ask also, what are the end uses 
for the photographs made by our group? Unless you are making exhibition 
prints 16x20 or larger, you will most likely never ever see any 
differences. For snapshot sizes, there is no way to see Leica quality. 
For material that is to be printed in books, magazines, or especially 
newspapers, there is no way most images will even remotely approach the 
quality Leica lenses are producing. For projected slides on a screen, 
the Carousel plastic projection lens that most people use puts your 
Leica pictures back in the Point&Shoot quality arena anayway. 
 
So, knowing that this is a controversial thought and expecting a 
suitable response, I really cannot see all the emphasis here on owning 
the best ever made. Are there more than one or two people on here who 
are using photographs that require ultimate quality? How many are using 
tripods to assure top quality images? How many are ruining resolution by 
shooting ASA 200, 400, or 1600 film?  

If money is no object or this is your profession, go for the best. If 
not, almost anything Leitz ever made is beyond the use to which is is 
being put. I would like to hear from a few more photographers and a few 
fewer test chart shooters. I feel that Leicas are just like all other 
cameras... made to be used, and to make photographs. Not to cuddle, 
coddle, and look at without touching. I really wonder about dreaming of 
owning a camera without a mark on it. My God, do you feel the same way 
about your automobile, your stereo, your TV, your new shoes? 

After all, folks, they are only cameras and lenses.... meant to be used 
and enjoyed. Get a life. 

Fred Ward