Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>Why compare 1.4 to 2? Did you really expect them to be comparable?<< Why not? I don't know, which is why I'm asking the questions. My perception, maybe wrongly, is that this is all about the superior quality of Leica glass and the quality of the image it produces. I didn't know that there are different levels of quality based on the speed of the lens. If this is true, I might have made different choices. Unless you are just talking about f-stops and not maximum apertures. I'm acquiring my kit at the moment at one major piece per month. The first, with the M6 TTL .85, was the 35mm f2. The results from this lens are truly astounding, so I expected, maybe with slight differences, that the image quality of all the Leica lenses would be on some sort of par and that's why it's worth spending over 10,000 GBP on the Leica kit. Now, instead of `expecting' the same quality, I find myself `hoping' that the 75mm 1.4 will be equal to the 35mm f2. However, does your message imply that it can only be compared to the 50mm f1.4, and that my next lens after the 75mm, which is the 90mm APO f2, can only be compared to the 35mm f2? Apologies if I've misunderstood. I pick up my first results from my new 24mm f2.8 today. Hopefully, I will gain a better idea of the differences in Leica glass at different speed lenses. >>Did you compare the same scenes?<< Not a test card, but pretty much the same scenes. Mostly of my baby daughter both interior and exterior, that's why I notice the difference. So are you saying that if I expose the 50 `lux at f2, it would be on a par with the 35 `cron wide open? Because I'm just in the `acquisition' stage at the moment, and want to ensure that I make the best and informed choices, (purpose of the LUG), it could be that I'm just thinking too critically about these things. Once this stage is over and I accept and get used to the gear I have and focus on the projects and images I want to produce, this constant stream of comparing will hopefully fade away. Although for my own purposes of use I want fast lenses, my ultimate aim is to replicate the fantastic quality, and `buzz' that it generated, that I first saw with a great photographer in Australia years ago with his Leica images. They just `snapped' out of the picture and the more I found out about Leica and the images it is capable of producing, I have never seen any equal from any other cameras and lenses. Thanks, Matt. - ---------- >From: Mike Quinn <mlquinn@san.rr.com> >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >Subject: Re: [Leica] 35mm, 90mm, and now 50 mm? >Date: Thu, Sep 21, 2000, 8:48 pm > > Why compare 1.4 to 2? > Did you really expect them to be comparable? > Did you compare the same scenes? > If you shoot both at 1.4 I think you'll prefer the 50mm 'lux.