Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for the explanation, Don. So I should stop baiting the R users, huh? :) Allan On Friday, March 29, 2002, at 09:44 AM, Don Dory wrote: > Allan, I have both lenses and yes, the Canon 100 is a very nice lens > indeed. > The difference is in the very fine to extreme fine detail. The Canon > 100 > has a higher contrast in the 10 to 20 cycles region so when there are > edges > in the image the perceived sharpness goes way up, this is much like a > high > adjuvancy developer. > > The Leica 60 and 100 especially pick up very fine detail(40 cycles and > higher) even in very even light. For example, imagine a newly opened > rose > bud. The Canon will pick up the edge of the petals and you will see > some > intimation of the veining in the petal but in the Leitz glass you will > see > the soft velvet of the texture of the petals. Assuming good technique > and > slower, finer grained film. > > This same analogy applies to the new versus old Leitz lenses. The older > lenses gave good edge sharpness so for example eyelashes looked crisp. > The > new designs let you see the clumping of the mascara, the fine lines and > veins in the eye lid, and texture in the shadows even when you are > blowing > out the highlights. Some prefer the old lenses as the transition to > OOF was > generally much smoother so it looked like more was sharp. > > Whether it is worth it to you to pay three times the price to get that > last > 5% of what is in front of you is an artistic decision that no one else > can > make for you. > > Now, can we stop playing my lens is better than your lens, and go out > and > create art or at least memories? > > Don > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html