Re: ASPH vs Aspheric

[Fred Ward <fward@erols.com>]

John Irvin Buford wrote:
> 
> that most people use puts your Leica pictures back in the Point&Shoot
> quality arena anayway.
> >
> >Fred Ward
> I own an EOS system for my PR stuff and I own and use Leica for the
> personal stuff that I love.  And, I do see the difference in quality at
> every turn.  But, My question to you is if you do not see the
> difference why do you use Leica.
> 
> John N3BVH

John, 

A good question that requires a response:

I have used Leicas from a 1936 model, to a III, to M3, M2, M4, CL, CLE 
for only a couple of what I consider to be good reasons.... they work, 
and they deliver. 

Unlike casual, hobby shooting, when you are 10,000 miles from home or a 
repair shop, on top of a mountain, at the bottom of the ocean, in Tibet, 
out in the desert, or wherever, the gear has to be reliable. I use 
Leicas because they work when then need to work. The rangefinders are 
simple, uncomplicated, well-made machines that do the job. 

The lens quality is very very good almost all the time, superb some of 
the time, and embarrassing occasionally. 

Conclusion, except the for all-too-often flaky CL, Leicas make pictures 
for people who need to make pictures under awful conditions and who 
can't worry about reliability. 

I have made the comment on here before..... all good lenses from all 
good camera manufacturers produce images that are better than the films 
we use. Going beyond that thought and wanting resolution that you can 
perhaps test but probably can never see seems wasted to me. 
 
That said, I will state one conclusion that has always impressed me. The 
slides I have from the 60s, made on M Leicas with the original 
Kodachrome 10 and then on the original Kodachrome 25 are still the 
best-looking technically-perfect images I have ever made. (That Kodak 
did not maintain Kodachrome as the world's superior film is tragic.) You 
may ask then why not use that combination today.... and the answer is 
that it just does not fit with today's requirements to get the job done. 
We need longer lenses without a Visoflex, faster films to make the kind 
of pictures expected now, and flexibility is more critical to the work 
than perfect images.
 
I hope that answers your question. 

Fred Ward