Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It is well known that colour neg film (in whatever speed range) is a vey effective killer of optical quality, and so using colour neg film it is hardly possible to analyse (objectively) or perceive (subjectively) any real differences between lenses or between apertures of a certain lens. When on holiday my girlfriend and I shot the same scenes on the same film (Kodak GPX: a really excellent fiilm and Ektar 200). She used a Canon 500, with a standard zoom (28-85). I used my M6 with lenses 28 to 90. The sun shining clearly all shots were done at 5.6 or smaller and the sun naturally enhanced the inherent contrast of the scenes. At home the films went to a normal lab and after that we mixed the prints (all 10x15cm), suitably marked at the backside, and asked experienced photographers to select the M pictures. No one could. The upshot: on colour neg and shooting in the sun and using apertures of 5,6 and smaller all lenses perform equally well. In fact the labs equipment is the only important factor here. IMHO thats the reason why so often the discussion about the relative merits of lenses of several marques is so inconclusive. It also tells you why the quality compacts of today can outshine their more expensive brothers. I saw recently colour negs , printed at A4 format taken with the new Leica minizoom. The subject was indeed quite critical. If the person had told me it was taken with a M camera I would have believed him! Erwin