Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 TEAShea@aol.com wrote: > << In my judgement, and apparent judgement of many on this listserve, > the lenses designed under the old philosophy, are not merely of superb > quality -- they are unique in their characteristics. >> > > They were of fine quality for their day, but their day has gone. They are > unique -- with unique distortions and unique lack of resolution and contrast > compared to today's lenses. > > Tom Shea > Tom S. I understand your point and do value low distortion, high resolution and good contrast. However, I get these fine qualities from my SLR Nikkor lenses. I turm to my M Leitz lenses to get the qualities I described in my earlier post: what I and many others interpret as 3-D sculpting, edge definition which separates fore-, mid- and background objects, superb tonal gradation even in shadow, and distinctive bokeh. As Leica moves to greater resolution, etc., as its ASPH line replaces its traditional line, we are losing the special image forming characteristics that made Leica lenses unique. I realize that my assessment is subjective, but I believe the assessment of an image should be subjective. The resolution of an image won't make or break it as an image which stirs the soul or elevates the intellect. And just what is the value of *objective* measures? Do we restrict our appreciation of and desire for another human being to her/his height, weight, IQ, bank account balance, etc.? Ultimately, I think personality and character make the crucial difference among people. Ultimately, I think personality and character make the difference among lenses. It's great for a person to be tall -- to a limit. Perhaps 6 feet for a guy is better than 5 feet, but is 7 feet better? 8 feet? 9 feet? Resolution and contrast is great for a lens -- to a limit. There is such a thing as resolution beyond the capacity of any film and contrast that's in appropriately high for many applications, e.g., portrature, and distortion control that's irrelevantly precise for three-dimentional subjects such as landscapes. Unless we do only technical photography, we have to understand the relationship between our lenses and and our photographic objectives and and make a subjective assessment. The traditional Leitz lenses are contrasty enough and have high enough resolution (I don't want to be much taller than 6 feet), I focus on their special qualities (we strive in our lives for better character, not greater tallness). Do I have any defenders out there? Subjectivity is much more credible when its a consensus of subjectivity. Thank you for your perspective, Tom. I really believe our opinions are not that different. I'm sure we both value both the objective and subjective criteria. Tom P. Happy Thanksgiving to you and all!