RE: [Leica] Leica announces $500 rebate on O Series

[Dan Cardish <dcardish@sympatico.ca>]

I just guessing here, but I suspect that many of the older lenses used more
brass than current lenses, and hence were heavier.  And I think that heft
adds psychologically to the feeling of quality in something.

I'm discovering that with the Minolta Dimage 7 digicam I recently acquired.
 It is getting a lot of bad press concerning its flimsy construction.
Admitedly, the lens barrel is plastic, and feels it, most of the rest of
the camera is a light weight magnesium alloy diecast construct, it just
"feels" plasticy.   It is proving to be quite durable, so far (I've already
dropped it onto a hard wood floor, no damage to camera).

dan c.

At 01:55 PM 23-08-01 -0500, Rodgers, David wrote:
>George
>
>I have a Zeiss 50/1.4 and it's a mighty fine performer, right down to f1.4.
>Actually, I think you can find them used for about $150 now. OTOH, it
>doesn't have the same robust feel as my 50/2 Summicron R. 
>
>When I used Contax system I definately felt that the German made lenses were
>mechanically better than those made in Japan. I know this is debatable, but
>I base that opinion on actual use. I still have an Contax 85/1.4 and 60/2.8
>Makro Planar. Both are rock solid. Both are German made. I also have 50/1.4
>and 35/2.8, both of which are Japanese made. The 35/2.8 front element is
>scratched to heck, but it still cranks out an impressive image. I use it
>when I enter the "Danger to Camera" zone. I sold all the newer Contax MM
>lenses I had, all of which were Japanese made. 
>
>I've never taken apart any lenses. So I don't really know what's inside. But
>just in using them I thought the German, Canadian, and even Japanese made
>Lieca lenses felt sturdier than the Japanese Contax lenses. Perhaps I'm
>making too much of that, as the older MF Nikkors also felt sturdier than
>many of the newer AF versions. Optically, most mid to high range lenses are
>pretty good, but I wonder about the longevity of some under heavy use.  
>
>Also, I never had much luck with Contax bodies. If I had a decent Contax
>body I'd probably use the 50/1.4 Planar more. It performs as well as the
>50/2 Summicron R in my eyes. A used 50/1.4 on an Aria body would be pretty
>sweet to own. Unless, like me, you can never escape the call of the Leica. 
>
>I checked out the "O". Didn't do much for me. I can't live with an f3.5 lens
>-- especially one that won't accept my current filters or lens shades -- no
>matter how good it might be. 
>
>Dave
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: George Day [mailto:george@rdcinteractive.com]
>Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:28 AM
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: RE: [Leica] Leica announces $500 rebate on O Series
>
>
>Ah, the Zeiss 50/1.4.  Where else can you get that much lens for $250?
>Leica, eat your heart out.  Or not, I guess.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Rei
>Shinozuka
>Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:45 AM
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica announces $500 rebate on O Series
>
>
>everybody's favorite magazine _pop photography_ has an entertaining
>review of the null in the sept issue (yellow cover).
>
>on page 90 they surprised me in concluding their lens test:
>
>"superb performance [ from the 50mm f/3.5 Leitz Anastigmat ] --
> the second best 50mm lens we have ever tested (edged out only by
> the 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss Planar) ... when used within its parameters,
> this upgraded classic lens provides outstanding image quality."
>
>-rei
>
>
>> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Jeff=20Williams?= <jeffwill_nz@yahoo.fr>
>>
>> Despite the fact that there are some detractors on the
>> list for this little jewel I can recommend it as a
>> lovely camera to use, one that requires the brain to
>> be fully engaged in order to get good results.
>> When you get it all right it is very satisfying to
>> use.
>