Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I scan film as well, and different lenses have a certain "character" which seems to show up in the scans (also at 2K or 4K resolution on a Nikon Coolscan V). But your interesting comments raise a question in my mind. What quality or type or size of wet print should we expect to reveal the fine optical quality of a Leica lens? That is, in an optimal (film, tripod, etc.) or in an "all-else-being-equal" setting. Scott Eric wrote: >Eric: > > > >>What lenses come close to leica performace? >> >>Or is this all blasphemy? >> >> > >I have both the Canon EF 50/1.4 & 85/1.8. > >Which come close to Leica? Depends on your work flow. I scan my negatives >and then work with the digital files for output. Perhaps if I used a drum >scanner, I could see more difference, but at a mere 4000 dpi, the scanner >can't capture all the resolution that either my Canon or Leica lenses can. >In my workflow, my scanner is the great equalizer. > >That said, at the end of day looking back, when I select the favorite images >from my body of work, the Leica ones are usually the front runners. Has >nothing to do with performance of the lens. Probably more the mindset I'm >in when using my Leica. > >-- >Eric >http://canid.com/ > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >