Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/11/26

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

Subject: Re: H'blad vs Leica
From: creadick@nando.net (Nowell & Jennifer Creadick)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 20:38:33 -0500 (EST)

At 8:13 PM 11/26/96, Erwin Puts/imX wrote:
>Brad,
>I did a thorough investigation in the comparative merits of Leica versus
>Hasselblad. The test parameters:
>A Hasselblad with 2,8/80 and a Leica 9M6) with Summicron 2,0/50. The leica
>was operated by me, the 'blad by a professional and experienced 'blad user
snip
 Then the results were presented to a
>group of people who knew of the experiment but did not know which picture
>was taken with what camera. Every one failed to see ANY difference between
>the prints.

My  first question is what were the skills of these viewers?  If one wishes
to be "competitive" with exhibition quality prints does one have to offer
the prints to be judged by very discerning eyes? Was this a very
experienced group of "image judges"?

Secondly, did the Leica prints, to a very sophisticated eye, have that "3-D
glow" we all see in our Leica prints from time to time?

Finally, I never offered my tips list (which was, thank you all, one of my
favorite threads on this list) but it was a short one:  I find 35mm to be
very film dependent.  100 speed or slower films and tripods make such a
difference.

Chapel Hill, NC

Although love may fail, courtesy should prevail.