Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:53 PM 9/17/98 +0200, you wrote: >Never mind. I've obviously stumbled on some sore points here, so I >shall stay out of this thread. I didn't mean to start a debate, and >I'm not advocating phobic fears of technological advance. Just made an >observation. Not a problem. Interchange is, and should be, fun. So don't ever be afraid to ask questions. Just ignore those who throw stones at others who like to share their opinions. (And when some of us seem to blow a cork and snap a bit. We, and they, get over it quickly and we're all friends again.) Leica NEVER designs unsharpness into a lens. It's just that some people seem to think that if a lens isn't perfect, there must be some reason for it. I don't know much about the 90 Summicron M, but the 90 Summicron R is a superb lens that I would never hesitate to use wide open for any application. So I suspect if there's a "flaw" in the performance of the M version, it's because it's been surpassed by such good new stuff it just looks like a slacker. So your observation is probably correct, for the wrong reason. Leica would never do that on purpose - unless they tell us they did. That's one thing I like about Leica, they're very up front in many ways with what a lens is all about. And I really don't think most people use it for portraiture. It's a myth in the larger photography world that that is what short teles are for. It shorthand for a lens that has gotten out of had, so to say. :-) - -- Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch Maintenance-free: When it breaks, it can't be fixed