Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D., I think there is one very good reason to use Leica glass you haven't mentioned: The ability to use a lens wide open with much less loss of performance than you get with almost all other glass. Are you saying that in available light conditions, at f/1.4 - 2.8, pro-level Canon and Nikkor lenses do as well as the newest Leica glass? I'm curious, not arguing. I see the difference between classic Summicrons and current Leica lenses. Close down a little, and it hardly matters for most practical purposes. Wide open, it's there. Have current pro-grade SLR lenses improved that much as well? Of course, with available light, we also get into the SLR vs. RF stuff, like focusing accuracy, lack of mirror slap, etc. - --Peter Klein Seattle, WA B.D. says: > True enough, Austin. But I believe that, for real world purposes - > which include most general uses of photographs - there comes a point > of no return in terms of improved image quality that can be seen by > the naked eye at normal viewing distances, whether on the printed > page, a slide screen, or a gallery wall - and modern Leica lenses take > the image well past that point. In fact, most pro Nikon and Canon > lenses take the image past that point as well, although there are > certainly some qualities possessed by some Leica lenses, particularly > comparative lack of distortion and flare in the wides, that can be > seen by the naked eye when compared to most lenses of other > manufacturers. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html