Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2023/05/02

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

Subject: [Leica] Leica lens quality as a forerunner to another "lens" race.
From: photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 20:41:28 +0200
References: <83b9ca39-6cc1-a054-e97e-1cd4444ea1be@gmail.com> <beccfaa2-6d72-7107-bf0e-c388cf2b4d85@summaventures.com>

I am in the same boat. I do not see myself ever buying a piece of new 
equipment from Leica. But I enjoy using my M2 (and I am happy to pay for the 
occasional CLA or other repair). I actually have another M-compatible body, 
a Voigtlander Bessa R2M. And best of all: a 50mm Summilux, a 90mm 
Tele-Elmarit, both roughly my age, and a more modern 35mm Summarit-M?the 
only piece of Leica equipment which I bought new. The 50 and 90mm Leica 
lenses work wonderfully on my Fuji X cameras (especially the E3) and also on 
the Panasonic GX80.

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
photo at frozenlight.eu

http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.frozenlight.eu

????? ???????! ?????? ?????!






> On 2 May 2023, at 18:17, Peter Dzwig <pdzwig at summaventures.com> wrote:
> 
> Peter,
> 
> I very much agree with you - and I think that you speak for many of us. My 
> M3 is a marvel and produces "that certain something". My IIIf does that 
> and, as Steve Gandy described it "is camera as art". There's a certain fun 
> in using them but they are an acquired taste. Digital is fine, but again 
> digital cameras change so frequently and of course we musn't forget the 
> ubiquitous smartphone which in a lot of area are evolving faster than 
> cameras and some even have Leica lenses!
> 
> I think that, unless I win the lottery, I have bought my last Leica they 
> really are rapidly going out of my reach.
> 
> However using my M3 lens - or even LTMs - on my Fujis is a hoot.
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 02/05/2023 04:30, Peter Klein via LUG wrote:
>> My love of Leica M cameras started c. 1970, when I discovered that I 
>> could focus a rangefinder more accurately and easily than an SLR. At that 
>> time, a used M2 was only a little more expensive than a new Nikon F. i 
>> bought one. I quickly noticed the better optics. The other stuff, the 
>> cult, the glorious history of Leica in photojournalism, I learned later. 
>> That was nice, and it made me feel part of something. But what truly 
>> mattered was that the camera fit me.
>> It's now over 50 years later, and many things have changed. Most medium 
>> to high end lenses are sufficient in optical quality. Autofocus can often 
>> be more accurate and faster than RF focusing by eye. The change from film 
>> to digital taught me that there is no such thing as perfection. The RFs 
>> that we thought were perfect on Kodachrome or Panatomic-X were calibrated 
>> to a reasonable compromise, which we could easily see once we went 
>> digital. Focus shift was real. Film grain and thickness covered up some 
>> optical flaws. But many of these flaws can only be seen when we pixel 
>> peep. Aside from jerks on Internet photo forums, who cares? Pixel peeping 
>> is a false god. There is a point (a zone, really) of diminishing returns 
>> on absolute optical quality.
>> I too have been to Wetzlar and watched Peter Karbe demonstrate how much 
>> better the newest ASPH lenses are, zooming into a flower until we could 
>> see the tiniest structures. It was miraculous and inspiring, and we were 
>> all in awe. But I also had to ask myself how much all this would help me 
>> in my mostly handheld photography. And how many thousands of dollars 
>> would I be willing (or not) to spend, just to push a smidge further into 
>> that zone of diminishing returns?
>> I suspect that solving problems like distortion and smearing in the 
>> corners and edges of the frame are not either-or solutions, but a matter 
>> of *both* optics and software. Let each craft do what it's best at, such 
>> that it annoys the photographer as little as possible. That may not be 
>> the best solution for competing with Japan, but it probably is the best 
>> photographic solution.
>> A big problem is Leica's prices. Most pro photographers left them long 
>> ago. Even most serious amateurs no longer aspire to Leica. Wetzlar just 
>> smiles, pushes the boundaries further and raises prices again.
>> In a way, I'm lucky. I bought most of my Leica lenses when they were more 
>> affordable. I'm happy with my M10-P and original "Henri" Monochrom. In 
>> some ways I prefer the aesthetics of the classic lenses. A couple of my 
>> lenses are (heresy!) Voigtlanders, and I like them. So I don't have to 
>> buy anything else if I don't want to. But that doesn't make me a Leica 
>> customer. It makes me a Customer Emeritus. I hope there are enough 
>> doctors, lawyers, dentists and collectors of expensive things to make up 
>> for folks like me.
>> --Peter
>> Don Dory wrote:
>> > I had the chance to talk to a high ranking individual within the Leica
>> > organization at breakfast.  The gist was that Leica was proceeding on an
>> > optical solution rather than a software enabled solution. Probably the
>> > better solution as if the information is there software can take it to 
>> > an
>> > even higher level.  However, it puts Leica on a cost effective curve 
>> > that
>> > makes their products even more exclusive: also, it hurts production 
>> > volume
>> > as some of their designs have very high defect rates by Leica standards.
>> > Obviously this drives an even higher price point.
>> >
>> > Last, one of the participants received a survey from Leica with one
>> > question about Japanese production of lenses at a (much) lower price
>> > point.  So, Leica is aware of the pricing problem and is trying to work 
>> > on
>> > it.
>> >
>> > Last, this Leica representative clarified the classic stool of any 
>> > product:
>> > price, size, performance.  You could have any two.  I am currently 
>> > weighing
>> > this as I own several of Sigma's most excellent lenses for the FE mount.
>> > Their performance is magnificent however the average weight is in the
>> > neighborhood of 1.5 kilograms compared to my 35 ASPH Summilux in the 
>> > high
>> > 300 grams.  The Sigma is a better lens but my shoulder and hand don't
>> > appreciate the weight as much as my eyes appreciate the image quality.
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> -- 
> 
> Dr. Peter Dzwig
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] Leica lens quality as a forerunner to another "lens" race.)
In reply to: Message from boulanger.croissant at gmail.com (Peter Klein) ([Leica] Leica lens quality as a forerunner to another "lens" race.)
Message from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Leica lens quality as a forerunner to another "lens" race.)