RE: [Leica] lens heresy

["Rodgers, David" <david.rodgers@xo.com>]

Colin, 

Part of me believes that any lens is a good lens. And certainly every lens
has strengths and weaknesses. 

There's a recurring question that seems to crop up, sometimes only subtly
implied, on the LUG. Why buy a $2,000 lens when a $400 lens will do? 

Here are my reasons. Usable fast aperture. Quality of build -- i.e.
longevity under heavy use -- perhaps. Not too many 20-year-old Soligors
still around. And certainly not those that experienced heavy use. I know
mine didn't hold up. 

Also, potential for enlargement is a big factor. I've got some Leica negs
and some brand X negs. They both look sharp under a loupe. They both make
sharp 8x10 prints. But the difference begins to show at 11x14, especially if
both are shot wide open. I can definately see a difference in negs taken at
f1.4 with a 35/1.4 ASPH M and the venerable 35/1.4 Nikkor.  

I also know for a fact that Leica negs are easier to print than those from
nearly every other 35mm camera system I've used. I don't know why. I just
know it to be so from experience. 

I'll admit that a lot depends on the whole photographic process. Use a Leica
with less than rock solid hands at 1/15th and the images won't be any more
sharp than those taken with any other camera and lens. Miss focus and the
same is true. But I think you can extract more from a Leica lens than you
can most other brands, given the inclination. 

I don't think any CRT viewed image is going to show off the potential of a
Leica lens over another lens, or visa versa. Nor will it prove that any lens
is great. It just proves that it's good enough for producing quality on-line
images. And with the current state of imaging, maybe that's good enough.
It's the photograph that matters.   

I agree, there's nothing wrong with other brands of lenses. Very nice
photograph, btw. 

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: Colin [mailto:CJV@home.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 8:48 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] lens heresy


Slightly OT:

There's nothing wrong with the Soligor - it's very good.  See here:

http://www.availabledark.com/images/maine04.jpg
Pentax Spotmatic, Soligor 90-230 f/4.5, Kodak EBX @200

And here:

http://www.availabledark.com/images/maine11.jpg
Pentax Spotmatic, Soligor 90-230 f/4.5, Fuji Velvia

As an aside, I like the Soligor in particular because the focus ring
curiously rotates in the opposite direction of my Pentax lenses; that
is, the same way (right way?) as Leica lenses.  I think it works well. 

Regards, 
Colin
http://www.availabledark.com


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Mark
Rabiner
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:00 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] lens heresy

Don Dory wrote:
> 
> But what flames will I get if I post some pic's shot with an SL and a
> Soligor 90-230 f4.5?
> Oh the shame, the shame.  The SL was so ashamed it lept off a shelf in
a
> suicide attempt.
> 
> Don
> dorysrus@mindspring.com

When i try this "dorysrus@mindspring.com" i get this:
"http://www.earthlink.net/" welcome to earthlink. What service can i
provide for you?"
Take me to your leader! Wait a minute i LIVE HERE!
Is that your website?! :)

Speaking of Earth does it make sense to put a Soligor 90-230 f4. 5 on a
Leica? 
to me that makes of course no sense. To me it makes sense to get a dirt
cheap
Yashica camera body and put a quality Zeiss lens for it.  Not the other
way
around. That's what makes sense to me. Glass. The body stops the film
from
fogging. Gives you a place to keep your film between exposures. Your
glass is everything.


Mark Rabiner

Portland, Oregon
USA

http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/