Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If you REALLY want to find out how crappy your technique is just use a grain focusing magnifier with a fine grain black and white film. You will never again believe there is any such thing as depth of field and you will swear that you have a constant case of the jitters! The point is, very few photographers print thier own stuff and of those that do, a large portion use high speed film almost exclusively. For these folks most of this discussion is esoteric. Good is good enough. (I won't get into why they payed so much for just "good"). I have come to believe that the best overall optical performance comes from the lens/camera combination that allows hand held use with a minimum of system vibrations. This rules out the SLR in most cases, and even the M is not as recoil free as....(and I hate to say it) the CONTAX G....man, that was painful. Best wishes, Dan States > >Bottom line the issue is more fundamental: there is without any doubt a >difference between the film register of a Leica body/lens unit and a >Konica body/lens unit and mixing these systems brings incompatibilities >and a drop in image quality. >If some argue that they do not see this difference, does that proof >there is no difference? >Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, someone of lost fame wrote in the >past. I would paraphrase: "image quality is in the eye of the >photographer". > >The classical discussion about which lens is best (Summicron DR or >current one) can be illuminated by the insight of the Konica/Leica >compatibility issue: if you do not see a difference, it does not imply >that there is no difference, but that the standards of image >quality/optical performance need to be upgraded or redefined. >Quoting from Zeiss for once: if a lens has a potential of 100%, most >users would have trouble extracting 50% of that. To extract 80% or more >needs considerable expertise and years of experience. >If the Konica/leica incompatibility will reduce image quality >significantly but not enough to get below the 50% threshold with which >most users seem to operate, all is fine? >In a wellknown German book (by Mr Scholz) the author fitted a Leica body >with a simple glass element from his spectacles (he could have used >the bottom of an empty bottle of whiskey with equal results) to prove >that a simple meniscus (box lens) would suffice for highly acceptable >image results. The resulting picture is very convincing. As long as we >seem unable to differentiate between a 9 element super quality optical >system and a simple spectacle glass in front of the M-body (or Konica >body) why question the impact of a mere 0.2 mm of defocus. >Would it not be time for a re-calibration of our standards of image >quality? > >Erwin > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com