Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Intro
From: jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier)
Date: Sat Jan 1 18:01:19 2005
References: <000001c4f051$85b84600$6401a8c0@dorysrusp4> <04965E96-5C4F-11D9-BE6B-000D932F570E@mac.com> <6.1.0.6.2.20050101155107.05a70bc0@192.168.100.42> <03AF5D5F-5C53-11D9-BE6B-000D932F570E@mac.com> <6.1.0.6.2.20050101162531.05aa8d80@192.168.100.42> <76ba89b3050101173266ffd782@mail.gmail.com>

Too many variables. However here is a recent comparison of Cosina and 
Leica wides. No contest as to who is better and who is a cheaper:

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/rd-1-lens.shtml

John Collier

On Jan 1, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:

> It's really a shame that there is not accepted means of evaluating
> lenses using a meaningful barometer. If someone would get a 36x24mm 20
> megapixel rangefinder, stick each of the Leica, Voightlander, Rollei,
> and Konica M lenses on it, shoot at a decent target at each f-stop,
> then at least we could have a gut level feeling for resolution,
> contrast, distortion, etc. Isn't there one rich camera buff out there
> who will do that for us? Please ? ;-)


In reply to: Message from dorysrus at mindspring.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Intro)
Message from driggett at mac.com (Christopher Driggett) ([Leica] Intro)
Message from richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard) ([Leica] Intro)
Message from driggett at mac.com (Christopher Driggett) ([Leica] Intro)
Message from richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard) ([Leica] Intro)
Message from jefferys at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Intro)