Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I am dropping the subject as it;s getting heated. No reason to argue just to prove one is right or wrong. Let me just say that from my own experience, just in terms of sharpness issues, if used properly, the E-3 images stand up quite well to the Leica M8. The M8 is sharper, but not MUCH sharper etc. Edge to edge, the Olympus is one of the best. Divide by the price, and it's probably the best, price performance wise. And just to reiterate, yes, I print, lots. Big too. And yes, I do prefer the Leica for 80% of what I do, because as a camera system, it fits my style more. The other 20% is because I need autofocus, zoom, low light (in some conditions), macro, telephoto, e.g. all the things that Leica rangefinders are not good for. Your mileage may vary of course, and if your M8 prints are MUCH sharper than your E-3 prints, good for you. My opinion differs, and we can just leave it as that. But Leica DOT is just a company. Its products have flaws, and if someone were to get upset about me saying the way I see it, well... not much I can do. On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Nathan Wajsman<photo at frozenlight.eu> wrote: > I thought you were gonna show pictures, Richard! These charts mean nothing > to me. Intellectually, I can read up on what they mean, but I fail to see > how to translate it into actual picture taking experience. The latter, > however, does tell me that the Leica lenses are superior, period. I have no > personal experience with the 50mm Summarit, but the 35mm version is superb > for the price. > -- // richard m: richard @imagecraft.com // w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog: http://rfman.wordpress.com // book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963