Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In article <20020102032344.22763.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com>, Henry Ting <henryting10@yahoo.com> writes: > physics". Where I'm standing, existentialism is what > exist, proven and controlled after my experiment. Not > at all quacky, don't you think ? Yeah. You sample two lenses and conclude your utter wisdom. Laughable. Sorry, but to really comprehend the complex thematics of optics, you for example should try out a Hektor with a 18-blade-diaphragm against some of those el-cheapo 4 or 5-blade-diaphragm lenses. _Then_ you will see that much more than just the focal-length is important to out-of-focus areas. The complete lense-design comes into play, as the bending of the light falling onto the film plane is what makes different out-of-focus rendering. It's not a leica myth, it's actually not a myth at all, it's just plain and stupid optics. Oh, and it is not connected to Leica at all, it's just that Leica-photog's tend to notice it more, since many of them shoot with full opened or almost full opened aperture. There is nothing funny about seeing no big difference between high-end Nikon lenses and Leica lenses. It's not as if Nikon produces just garbage ... Oh, another nice subject for testing would be to run a zoom lense against a prime lense. Should give you additional input for drawing conclusions. bye, Georg - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html