Re: [Leica] 75mm off the deep end?

[John_McLeod@designlink.com]

David -

Maybe there really is (!)something more to lens design and quality than
resolution, which tends to be the focus of Popular Photography's tests. 
Recently, I have had a few private e-mail exchanges with not only you, but Eric
Welch, Donal Philby, Vahan Vashinian, Harrison McClary,and others on the list
regarding the qualities of Leica glass that are distinctive relative to Nikon
and Canon, for example.

Most of us have been brought up with the basic idea that the number of lines on
a chart that a lens can resolve is what lens performance is all about.  When I
go to buy a used lens, the seller will often assure me "don't worry it's very
sharp" and then I look to see whether it is (usually in the center of the
frame, wide open and at middle apertures).

Not to speak for them, but I think that folks with pro experience such as Eric,
Donal, Vahan, and Harrison will tell us that there is A LOT more to performance
than resolution.  Donal recently challenged us to pick out the Leica photos (2)
and the Nikon photo (1) from his website shots at the Republican convention
(under I Personal Projects, right Donal?).  At first I thought, no way is a
scanned photo on my passive matrix Mac PowerBook screen going to reveal subtle
differences between Nikon and Leica.  Check it out!  The differences are easy
to see -- more contrast, more saturation, less flare in the 2 Leica photos.

Of course these two pictures are only samples, the subjects and lighting were
different in the 3 shots, and who knows exactly why these pictures came out as
they did.  But there are those who argue with conviction that Leica (and
Contax) images do exhibit strengths in image smoothness, contrast, and
gradation that other fine Japanese lenses cannot quite match.

John McLeod