Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/30

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

Subject: Re: Marc Riboud Show
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 17:43:28 -0500

At 01:39 PM 8/30/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>	I think that there is some qualitative difference to the feel of
>the images produced with Leica lenses, a difference that some people are
>more sensitive to than others.  I wouldn't go so far as to proclaim that

Yes, there is a difference. Certainly not superior in any sense for many
people. I have used Canon EOS and the latest Nikon glass, and there is a
clear difference in the image quality (not good or bad, different) between
the two lines. Nikon's much warmer and contrastier. Canon's lenses see to
have higher resolution. (Sorry, I don't shoot newspapers on walls, these
are subjective evaluations with my 20/10 20/15 eyes). Leica is also
different. It's easy to see after using them for over 10 years, much of it
professionally. 

In fact, where Leica lenses really shine (forgive me for repeating what
I've said in years past on this list), is when the chips are down. Nasty,
flat lighting, horrid backlighting, etc. In those situations (and I have
done side-by-side comparisons with a colleague and Canon L series where his
stuff was totally unusable and mine was wonderful and he said so) Leica
stands out above the rest - that I've used. (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Leica,
Contax). I have little experience with Contax lenses. And I didn't like the
color bias.

- ---------------------
Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR

Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.