Re: [Leica] The anti-R conspiracy (was: CdI Web site)

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Eric Welch wrote:
> >did you read the test of leica R lenses in CDI, it's tough!
> >Even the famous Apo telyt R 180 f/3.4 is heavily criticized! Good
> >performance but much too expensive compared to N or C brand!
> 
> Yeah, well people who don't own them (and wish for justification for not
> owning them) might think so, but for those of us who do own such lenses we
> know they're worth every penny. For example, if I had to pay $5,300 for the
> 70-180 2.8 Vario Apo Elmarit R, I'd pay it (when I had it). Thankfully (to
> Ted) I didn't. I've used Nikon's 80-200 2.8 and Canon's 70-200 2.8 L -
> neither lens can touch this one. It's astounding.

Eric,

You are toooo much. Thanks to you, now I understand better what is going
on: the Holy Name of R by L is victim of a conspiracy of people on a
budget who are jealous of the wealthy guys who are able to buy L lenses.
Only the selected few true disciples capable of paying can see the Light
and know the Truth. All those tens of thousands of successful pros,
millions of knowledgeable amateurs and the specialised press and test
labs that keep them misinformed know nothing... ;-)

Well i own a M6 and quite a few lenses, and let me tell you: that system
is small and efficient, and the slides look real good when I do not f...
up, it is beautifully made and sexy to use, but NO, it is does not offer
any rational price/quality ratio... It simply is the only tool of its
kind currently available. That is NOT the case of the R line...

I know these are flameable statements, but since newbies (hi guys, I was
a newbie too a few months ago) keep popping in for info, I do not want
to let them throw hard earned money away because they might be seduced
by the mysticism of some statements. L provides a lot of quality and
provides a luxurious alternative to the dominant players on the
photographic market, but it does not provide a pass to high quality
images: if you use a super heavy tripod and shoot a wonderful picture
with a Nipenmincanax and any of their medium to high range lenses, it
would MAYBE have been very marginally more seducing if shot through L
glass. That is "MAYBE" and "marginally" means by a VERY SMALL margin. If
you shoot an average image with your Nipenmincanax, do not kid yourself,
it would have been just as average through L glass.

Clearly I'm just a jealous guy.

I'll put my flame proof costume on now.

Friendly  regards
Alan.

Alan.