Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>> but some people like thinking for themselves, rather than blinding following a "lens expert" who apparently has no degrees in the subject, nor professional experience working for a lens maker designing testing lenses. >>> So would the same independent thinkers people prefer to blindly follow an expert with 20 years experience? There's a Professor Laithwaite at London University, with many years experience as an engineer/physicist (can't remember which) who passionately espouses the old chestnut of gyroscopes producing an anti-gravity effect. He's wrong. Gyroscopes are effectively dealt with and archived at A-level in perfectly normal classical dynamics. There is no mystery. On the other hand there's someone like Erwin who, possibly with no formal qualifications, is capable of turning a hobby (lens testing) into a true expertise. He evidently likes thinking for himself. It is _so_ futile worrying about qualifications. Reading all these angry mails about lens resolution and Konica mount tolerances, I've finally come to the conclusion that the only thing that counts is what the slide/scan/print looks like. And in my case, since I only ever hand hold at lowish shutter speeds, I'm sure that a Voigtlander lens on a Konica body will do just as nicely as a Leica lens on an M6. I don't think I'll ever have a 16x20 print of one of my snaps made, and if I did it would be for my retrospective at MOMA at which time the resolution of the lens will not be the deciding factor. If HCB could build a career on out of focus muddy prints, I'm sure I can too. But please, keep on arguing! I wouldn't have missed John's "zzzz" or Joe's monkeys and typewriters quip for the world. Rob.