Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alex Brattell wrote: >Don't get this, and I bet Noctilux users are similarly bemused.>>> Hi Alex, Yep, "bemused" alright. The stuff they put out isn't worth the time to read, be better off shooting pictures, as that's the "real test!" I bet before all this CDI and photo magazine testing started, photographers, certainly this one, never did testing of glass. You bought the lens, put it on the camera and went to work shooting your assignment. If the images you shot looked great, that was it. Like, "keep it simple stupid!" What counts most? The exciting well executed content or the mm per whatever? And yes there have been improvements, asph.for example and it counts, but I would have switched to the asph knowing it was supposed to be better, sharper etc. But I would have taken it out of the box, gone for broke without wasting film to find out if it were. As it would've shown up in the assignments I was shooting. And that's still the ultimate test. End images. On the LUG I'm always surprised how much time some folks put into testing back and forth, while blowing film to look at test shots, instead of real time pictures. I haven't ever photographed a test bench in a 50 year career, recently I thought I should find a test bench and shoot it to see what all the testing was about. ;) Anyway, to each his own on this stuff, what I don't give a hoot about others get their jollies, so be it. I'd still rather take pictures and look at whether I'm turned on by the content rather than concern for "crispies in the corners." ted Ted Grant This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler. http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant