Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 9/8/99 11:16:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, tedgrant@islandnet.com writes: << Who cares what hardware he uses? He's the human being who sees the scene, uses a black box carrying light sensitive film and exposes it at the appropriate time. >> Yes but Rowell doesn't shoot impressionistic dreamscapes and his work depends to a great extent on sharpness, contrast and color rendition (to which he devotes a great deal of text) which are characteristics touted here ad infinitum as hellmarks of the superiority of Leica glass. And isn't it a characteristic of the most successful (in any field) that they constatly push the limits and strive for improvement, never being satisfied with less than the best? So, if it is true what is written often in the posts here, i.e. that Leica glass "blows away" or "kicks the crap" out of everyone else's glass, wouldn't you stop to wonder how that has eluded someone like Rowell throughout a career spanning decades? This isn't a put-down of Rowell's visionary talent, it is simply a question posed regarding equipment choices made by someone who has devoted no small amount of space in his books and magazine columns to discussions of his equipment.