Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Lucien, I would have thought so too! Though it would be interesting how many people buy the 100 APO simply because of its reputation as a great lens and how many buy it because they need a macro lens of that focal length. The 100/4 was not a big seller so far as I could tell. >A R-90/2 Apo-Asph is a different story, it may hit both >the R-100/2,8 Apo and the R-80/1,4. I was only reporting what my informed source divulged - I sometimes wonder who or what is guiding Leica's product development given this and other strange developments. I would have personally expected the 50/1.4 and 50/1.0 to be more due for redesign (perhaps ASPH) than the 90/2.0. My impression is that they have ignored the professional market for a long time but are now, perhaps, and not very effectively, trying to catch up. Let's hope though! The R8 motor debacle is really quite ludicrous: Leica loses IMHO a huge amount of potential sales by failing to have a decent motor for either M or R. Why, by way of another example, come out with a 24mm M lens before the w/a viewfinders are redesigned to be tougher and stay put?? Having 20 year old second-hand products that are (rightly or wrongly) generally regarded as functionally superior (as well as aesthetically) such as the old metal viewfinders can only continue to undermine Leica's current reputation for quality whilst raising the price of secondhand equipment. As for the German leadership in optical technology I do not buy that as a blanket truth any more: in some cases their priorities in design and manufacture produce a better product but in more instances the Japanese have stolen a march on the Germans - for instance in 35mm zooms, autofocus technology, aspherical production and polycarbonates to name a few areas where Leica follows rather than leads. The bottom line for most LUGGERS, myself included is in the image quality and finer mechanical feel of Leica equipment: but neither of these aspects to lens making can justify leadership. Nikon came out with a professional grade 80-200/2.8 lens a decade before Leica's 70-180/2.8 so who is leading whom these days: which Leica lenses reflect a technological lead over Japanese ones? Remember image quality is not the only criterion for lens technology: in the same way that acceleration is not the only aspect to a race car that decides who wins the race.