Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Oh, well, Ken, It's us "neurotics" that keep the damn old system viable anyway!! That said, now I have to go get my (free) Cinelli framset that was given to me, and start finding some Nuovo-Record shit to install one it.....(HONEST!!!- HOW IRONIC)...then I'll lose 50lbs and be 18 again.....on my 1975 racing machine! (I'm not making any of this up!!!) Best to U and URS, Walt (BTW, the guy "thinks' he has Campy tools with it, he's looking for me) On Sat, 13 Mar 1999, Ken Wilcox wrote: > Walt, I have to agree with you one the lens issue. My nieces senior > pictures which I took with a 90 Elmar from 1949 were a great hit. There are > differences in lens but for mosst of my purposes at least, it is not > significant. I own a mix of lenes from the above mentioned to the 75 > Summilux and Noctilux as well as some for the R system, most, but not, all > purchased used. (As a publoic school teacher I am definately NOT inthe > economic stratosphere) I always base my lens choice for a job on speed and > focal length without much thought as to how "sharp" the lens is. They are > all sharp enough. > > I do think Leica has no choice about continuing to improve lenses. The > reputation of Leica glass sells cameras and lenses. If R&D lag, eventually > it will be said that the lenses are no longer competitive. True or untrue, > it will hurt the company and I won't be able to get my favorite tools. > > Ken Wilcox > > At 09:37 AM 3/13/99 -0600, Walt wrote: > >Has the "law of diminishing returns" no applicability to this > >group? Is the economic status of this group (as I've noted > >before) so far into the stratosphere that economic issues are > >not a factor?.....(for those of you familiar with the allusion, > >are we all Harry Pearsons of "the Absolute Sound"?) > > > >Certainly, if one buys a new lens, and the difference between > >the immediately previous model and the current "APO" or whatever > >is 10-20%, one should opt for the new one....but in a real-world > >example, should I sell my 1970 EXC 50 Summicron for $300 and > >buy a new one for $1000? or sell my 35 Summicron for $500 and > >buy the "APO" for three times that? I think a dose of reality > >is in order. > > > >The top 1-2% performance gain IN ANY MANUFACTURED object costs > >an additional 100% or more (sometimes MUCH more)....and will > >make NO better pictures, better sound, better transportation, etc. > > > >Even though a person has the MONEY to do this kind of illogical > >purchasing, it is truly quest for the "holy grail"...a goosechase, > >etc....and is not prudent thinking....especially since most people > >have trouble with the bodies, and are in no way approaching the > >limits of thirty year old optics in their photography. Lets > >request reliable, well adjusted RFDR bodies that stay that way, > >leave the lenses where they are until the rest of the system > >catches up. > > > >Cheers, > >Walt > > ------------------ > Ken Wilcox Carolyn's Personal Touch Portraits > LAW LHSA MEA <wilcox@tir.com> >