[Leica] Auto vibration reduction

[passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro)]

Mark --

I agree with you except in two regrads:

1. Many of us came to Leica and hold its aesthetic and photographic values
dear not out of low-tech purist convictions but because of the elegance of
the thing, and especially the elegance of its traditional size, \\\\\The
first time I picked up a Nikon D90 in B & H -- a D90 is on the smaller end
of the Nikon DSLR range -- with an 77mm filter thread 85mm 1.2? 1.4? lens on
it, it felt so unpleasantly huge. I kept thinking it was something I could
use to sand my walls. Barnack invented the thing to be small and so it
should be, I often think.

2.  It's Doug who's expressing considerable skepticism about the effect on
sharpness of IS in the lens. Just as you say the techs at Nikon and Canon
know their jobs, so much does Doug (I believe) know his. You can count head
feathers at hundreds of yards in some of his pictures. So if he says it it's
probably got some merit, I think.

Some of those IS lenses are real big and real ugly, unfortunately. too. Is
what I'm saying.




On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
wrote:

> Gallery owners faces?
> I would have guessed the vast majority of stuff the landscape and wildlife
> gallery people get are done with state of the art stabilization glass and
> the gallery owners wouldn't know the difference but invest in people who
> produce consistent quality results. Later they find out which of these
> people have low or high tech approaches. I'd guess most of them would have
> high tech modern approaches using the newest glass coming out very day from
> Nikon and Canon and not search eBay for the stuff made before anti
> vibration. I don't think Nikon and Canon is all of a sudden coming out with
> more and more inferior ways to make photographs just so they can put a VR
> or
> IS acronym on the barrel and charge more. I'm a huge fan of more elegant
> lens designs but when they add a bunch of elements for the VR and IS
> reasons
> they do have a clue what they are doing as they kind of test it out ahead
> of
> time.
>
> I think we on the LUG and other places can embrace a low tech approach and
> make competitive results. But to think that people who have not eschewed
> modern optics are coming out with drek I don't think really adds up and we
> few low tech people are best off on the defensive not offensive.
> Here on the lug you would think plenty of us have eschewed many of the
> modern conventions in photography instead doing it the Leica way.
> SLRS
> Auto focus
> Auto vibration reduction - NOT hard core "Leica" approach involved a much
> lower tech approach and we can show them up and make for competitive or
> better images then the standard approach used by just about everybody
> nowadays. Which is to use DSLRS with AF and IF and IR or whatever acronym
> you want to call it.
> To say that the use of these technology's makes for non competitive
> inferior
> results I don't think holds up.  I think that the bulk of images we see in
> front of us on the gallery walls and searchable in the internet in the
> better places are done that way.
>
> [Rabs]
> Mark William Rabiner
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>