Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Not wanting to get into a mud wrestling match here, but I don't think we're saying the same thing...This particular lens tested as a piece of shit and shot as a piece of shit and was purchased - by those who knew that it was a piece of shit - because they didn't have any choice, NOT because they found that while it tested as a piece of shit it worked well in the field...that's another issue entirely... - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 1:53 PM To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us' Subject: RE: [Leica] LUG, Leica culture, lens testing and No BS I think we are saying the same thing. I agree it was a dog, but my point is that it sold even if it tested lousy. People wanted the convenience of a zoom. So while testing had its place, and this lens tested as a poor performer, it still made its way into the PJ world. Not everyone wanted a perfectly razor sharp and clear photo, sometimes they just wanted the photo. Peter K - -----Original Message----- From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 10:10 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] LUG, Leica culture, lens testing and No BS Does anyone remembers the Nikkor 38-76mm zoom? The one Nikon apologized about because it was not a sharp optic. It tested lousy. But still sold in large numbers to many PJs and others in the 60s because it offered something they wanted, a short zoom! Even if it was not as tack sharp as say the 50mm F1.4 Nikkor, they found it usable. - ----- Peter - While I agree with some of what you said in this post about less than optimal equipment meeting people's needs for certain purposes, I really have to say you're way off on this lens. This lens was a DOG. Woof! Woof! A coke bottle in a zoom housing. It mostly sold to "amateurs" who wanted a Nikon, wanted a short zoom, and didn't know the difference. PJs who bought and used did so at the time because they needed a short zoom and there was no alternative. As soon as there was an alternative, this turkey was history, and really sad history at that. And, yes, I owned one - and it was a bit like having a zoom with a non-removal "soft" filter on it! B. D.