Re: [Leica] Re: Building a Leica system

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

There it goes again, I'm just sucked in my those unilateral statements.
Can't help it, my apologies to all the bored luggers. 

Eric: Just like you, I use intensively Leica glass, last generation, on
my M6. I am very probably just as experienced as you are in matters
related to photography. I could also agitate that 'pro' BS the way you
do, but I will not because I do not consider myself 'good' enough for
it. But this still allows me to maintain that there is no black magic
going on in normal handheld shooting conditions with the gear we are
discussing here. There are very good imaging performances, which I've
encountered also using many other sources of hardware. There is NO
obvious competitive advantage on the grounds you keep on coming back to.
The main reasons to use Leica M are NOT those. Ted Grant has recently
given a pretty convincing list of REAL practical advantages to invest in
that system and I have my own. 

On basis of statements by everyone here and on basis of my close
examination of many images mediated through Leica R hardware in their
final form (magazines, prints, Leica luxury books, web sites, whatever),
I have no problem accepting the idea that the imaging potential of the
lenses of the R line is quite similar to what I experience with the M
line. And therefore NOT radically better than, or even not radically
different to, what is provided by other 35mm SLR systems at half the
price, and often much less than that. 

But that line of products has other characteristics that might make it
an attractive proposition for the wealthy enthusiast: the touch and feel
of the lenses, the mechanical smoothness of operation, the ergonomy of
the bodies are obvious qualities, and differentiate it from most of the
others. It is a seducing line of hardware. But much too expensive as a
tool to record images if you consider it through a reasonable
performance/feature/price matrix.

Again: this is for normal handheld shooting conditions, not necessarily
for the heavy tripod trip, which is not my trip with 35mm anyway. This
is NOT misinformation. This is an opinion. As founded or unfounded as
yours. I wish you could accept to treat it as such.

You say yes, I say no, you say etc. Useless debate. Sorry: IMHO, that
'magic 3D glow' is in the eyes of the beholder, and your eyes are full
of "awesome" stars. Lucky you...

Alan.

Eric Welch wrote:
> 
> >ave seen slides shot with the 50
> >Summicron that have an unusual 3-D quality to it which I have not been able
> >to get with my Nikkors. Call me mad or deluded but I stand by what I saw.
> >And the colours and tonal rendition are simply beautiful.
> 
> You are not wrong. That's what keeps many of us defenders of the R system
> from those who have never used it extensively and yet feel they have to
> tell people it's not worth it. We're not fanatics, or deluded. Just sick of
> the misinformation.
> --
> 
> Eric Welch
> St. Joseph, MO
> http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch
> 
> Today's subliminal thought is...