Re: [Leica] your opinion about G2

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Hi B.D.,

Well, I like the looks, functionalities and build of the G2. But if
there is something it does not prove, it is that "it is possible to
produce extremely high quality optics - Leica quality optics - at a
fraction of the cost at which Leica produces and sells them". I am not
discussing MTF, lpm and all that, but the construction itself. 

If you look at it closely, Contax has found an ingenious way of
simplifying lens construction right down to the core: the focusing
process is managed by the in-camera motor, through a simple cam. The
lens itself is basically a few high quality glass elements moving on a
very simple pattern, a CPU, CPU and shaft connexion with the body, a
basic manual iris and a very beautiful titanium outer barrel. If you
compare this with the M lenses, you realise how unsophisticated the G
lens construction is. 

Simplicity might be good, sometimes. In this case, it deprives the G
user from ESSENTIAL functionalities. It deprives the user from the
ability of focusing the lens himself and it deprives the user from any
information regarding depth of field. The user has to delegate the whole
focusing process to the camera/lens CPU intercation. The so-called
manual mode of the G is simply a way of getting to a sort of "AF lock":
no other middle to high end AF system I know of (SLR world) delegates as
much to the computer and motors.

The very bad part of all this is that the electronic rangefinder of the
G is a temperemental system, often reliable, sometimes not, but never
giving any hint if it does the job or not. This is THE reason why there
are no ultra-fast lenses in the G system. 

And despite the horror stories of the last 48 hours, the M system is
designed in a way that allows VERY reliable and controlable focusing.
This is also due to the complexity of the M lens design and the
complexity of the interaction between the M lens and the M telemeter. I
am convinced that the mechanical design of the Leica lenses is a major
factor in their price. 

At the end of the day, despite the looks and the marketing, the G system
is a lot of good things, but it is not an alternative to the M. I would
NEVER dream of using a 21mm that I would not be able to prefocus in a
simple and reliable way.... 

Friendly regards
Alan

B. D. Colen wrote:
> 
> If nothing else, the G2 is living proof that it is possible to produce
> extremely high quality optics - Leica quality optics - at a fraction of the
> cost at which Leica produces and sells them. If Zeiss/Kyocera can produce a
> 21 2.8 autofocus lens - with a viewfinder - that is at least as good as the
> current Leica 21 - without a viewfinder - that can sell in the US for under
> $1000, perhaps its time Leica woke up and smelled the economic coffee...