Re: [Leica] your opinion about G2

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Peter,

I expressely stated that I was not discussing optical performance as
such : I am not qualified to do so, and do not have any benchmarking
tools at my disposal. I was discussing the fact that the price delta
between G and M lenses has reasons other than Sölms greed: the
mechanical construction of the M lenses (and body) is MUCH more complex
than that of the G. 

The G simplicity entails the loss of some of the features I find
essential: it prevents the user from focusing the lens himself and it
excludes any depth of field scale on the lens. Those 2 major drawbacks
are aggravated by the electronic telemetering behaviour of the G2 (and
G1 seems worse from what I read). The G design entailed, in my personal
experience, an unacceptable proportion of flagrant focus misses and not
so obvious near misses. I have not encountered those with the M system,
and I place a lot of confidence in the design of the opto-mechanical
telemetering device of the M and on the mechanical interaction between
the M body and the M lens. There is a financial price to such mechanical
complexity.

So there is IMHO an indirect link between mechanical design and imaging
performance in this particular case.

friendly regards
Alan


Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) wrote:
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> I disagree. Please tell me how the construction of a lens adds to the actual
> photographic quality of an image.  If this happened to be true, every EOS
> user would still be using Canon F1s or for that matter Nikon F2 cameras.
> 
> Peter K.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Ball [mailto:AlanBall@csi.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 06, 1998 10:51 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] your opinion about G2
> 
> Well, I like the looks, functionalities and build of the G2. But if
> there is something it does not prove, it is that "it is possible to
> produce extremely high quality optics - Leica quality optics - at a
> fraction of the cost at which Leica produces and sells them". I am not
> discussing MTF, lpm and all that, but the construction itself.
> 
> If you look at it closely, Contax has found an ingenious way of
> simplifying lens construction right down to the core: the focusing
> process is managed by the in-camera motor, through a simple cam. The
> lens itself is basically a few high quality glass elements moving on a
> very simple pattern, a CPU, CPU and shaft connexion with the body, a
> basic manual iris and a very beautiful titanium outer barrel. If you
> compare this with the M lenses, you realise how unsophisticated the G
> lens construction is.