[Leica] Leica lens quality as a forerunner to another "lens" race.

Tue May 2 18:49:08 PDT 2023

It is no surprise that Leica has to look further afield than photographers
as its target market if all the die hard Leica using photographers refuse
to buy any new equipment. It is absolutely natural that they would like to
survive as a company! 😊

Cheers
Jayanand

On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:11 AM Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu> wrote:

> 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
>
> Слава Україні! Героям слава!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information