Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]you wrote: <<I am not sure what we are trying tosay using a 35MM LEica is superior to a 4x5 or 8x10 image. WE are trying to compare apples and oranges.>> for sharpness I think that it is hard to beat a LF chrome that has applied the appropriate movements. For me there is nothing like a 8x10 chrome. It will knock the socks off anything. We all believe that there is not anything better than a LEica 35MM image. If that was absolutely true than there would not be a need for the MF industry or the LF industry. Leica over the years would have totally destroyed there markets. IT has been said that the 150MM F4 Schneider Tele Zenar for the Rollei 600x cameras is is as sharp of the portrait lens that there ever was. I believe that LEica is as good as it gets but there are other options that can not be discounted. >> - --------------- Good way of putting it. But at the core there must be a judgment made. Comparing feature to feature doesn't quite cut it (i.e. sharpness, portability). Everywhere is X vs. Y. Then a feature list. It's fine for specs. But Leica is more than what can be laid out on the table. Not "status", whatever it is, I won't (can't) define it, but it's there. I think its justified. Even when it's bad it's interesting. This sort of thinking can be 'debunked' but, I guess that part of the bug. <snip> eno