[Leica] Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 ZM Distagon rumor

[George Lottermoser]

On Sep 12, 2014, at 10:15 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj wrote:

> It is my experience that all photographic equipment deliver what the user
> wants them to deliver. If you are  subconsciously eager to justify that the
> equipment should deliver what you want, then you will only see the
> positives; if you subconsciously want it to come off badly, then you will
> nitpick till the cows come home. It is not easy to be balanced and
> objective, though every single person thinks they are so, in reality they
> are a bundle of subjective prejudices (including me). In today's
> marketplace I know of no manufacturer who turns out inferior stuff - most
> digital camera systems turn out remarkably good results.

no one was talking subjectively about "inferior" anything Jayanand.

We were discussing the objective testing
of specific lenses
on specific cameras
and 
whether or not the sensor design
could deliver adequate quality
at edges and corners of a 24 x 36 frame.

Obviously the Sony and Fuji cameras deliver wonderful results
with lenses optimized for their designs;
as well as with some other lenses that were designed for film cameras of a different era.

Though
Not with every lens ever designed to cover a 24 x 36 mm frame.

The under performing lens/sensor combinations can be objectively observed by anyone
who cares to look at the testing that has been extensively done.

This isn't some subjective hokey pokey.

My 15 mm Super Elmarit performs better on the FF M (240)
than it does on my DMR cropped sensor
Who'd have thought?
Surprised the hell out me.
Why?
Because the of the micro lenses and thinner glass on the M sensor.
This is objective physics and science;
not subjective, aesthetic opinions.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 

http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist