Re: [Leica] JB, filters, flames, and technique

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Dan,

I do not know if there are "bad" Leica lenses. But I do not really
"know" if there are "bad" Anybrand lenses being produced today either.

That is why we go on arguing endlessly on test results, and if those are
not satisfying for the hardware of our favourite suppliers, then we go
on arguing endlessly on benchmark procedures.

So, stuck beteween the usage of the meaningless "awesome" qualifier by
fanatical users, and the contradictions between the various test results
from the various labs, we are condemned to make purchasing choices that
might not always be the most rational ones. 

At the end of the day, the end results decide. And I guess each of us
grows to 'love' the lenses that have been used for the best of crop
pictures in our collections.

After 25 years of active photography, I've come to a list of
'favourites' that, unfortunately, span most manufacturers. Which is not
a financially rational conclusion ;-)

My private 35mm list keeps very fond memories of a CZ 50mm f1.4, a
Nikkor 85mm f1.8 AF, a Nikkor 24mm AF, a Pentax 100mm f2.8 macro, a
Pentax 40mm f2.8 pancake, amongst others. I have grown to 'love' my M6
setup because it has brought me a very nice crop of images. I have grown
to 'adore' the Tamron 90mm f2.5 SP2, because of the multiplication of
wonderful portraits I managed to get through it. The slides and prints
that captured the light through all these lenses pop back up every now
and then for close examination. No way does any supplier "kill" the
others on sheer rendition grounds...

Maybe the fact that each 'average' Leica lens costs more than an
'average' monthly income encourages buyers to be convinced that these
are the best. Which they maybe are. And maybe are not...

Alan
Brussels-Belgium

Dan Cardish wrote:
> 
> Maybe this is the distinguishing feature of Leica lenses.  As far as I
> know, there are no *bad* ones.  A new user has nothing to fear in choosing
> any reasonably recent lens made by Leica.  With Nikon I hear about all
> sorts of lenses that we are warned to stay away from.  A friend asked me
> about the quality of 35mm Nikon lenses.  Well, is it the f2.8 (not so
> good), or the F2 (very good), or the 1.4 (don't really know) etc.?   I
> never remember and have to keep reference guides close at hand.   This
> isn't necessary with Leica.
> 
> Dan C.
> 
> At 09:19 PM 23-11-98 EST, Nigel wrote:
> >The only thing you can tell from a print is the quality of the printing.
> >Leica lenses are magnificent.  As a Leica and Nikon user,  I do not
> >believe that Nikon lenses uniformly look "flat".  But, I have picked and
> >chosen my Nikon lenses *carefully* from amongst the lot,  something I
> >don't need to do with Leica--they're *all* superb; [snip]