Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hehehe, just wanted to get that on the record, BD! :-) I know what you mean...too many people treat their Leicas as cult objects rather than simply good tools. But there is a visible difference, depending on which lenses you are comparing. I don't bother with testing lenses, but I can spot the imaging characteristics of certain specific ones. As an example, I often will have a mixed bag of images from a shoot done with the 16 or 17-35 f2.8L Canon EF lenses and the Elmarit 21 ASPH and Summilux 35 ASPH. Anyone who cannot spot the differences between these three lenses must have a glass eye, as the differences are obvious: The 16/17-35s will exhibit markedly lower contrast, color saturation, and sharpness than the Elmarit or Summilux, especially at large apertures. The difference in backlit situations is even more obvious because the 16/17-35 images will have alot of flare (esp 16-35) and color fringing (esp 17-35) in areas of extremely high contrast. Edges and corners with the 16/17-35 will have a smeared appearance. At 21mm, the EF 16/17-35s exhibit severe barrel distortion. I can often spot an image taken with the 16/17-35. On the other hand, if you are shooting in a fast moving situation, with crowds all around, there is nothing like the 16/17-35! On the other hand, I'm not sure I could spot the diferences so readily in a fairer comparison with EF fixed focals. Perhaps not. Also, I can't see the difference when it comes to the telephotos. The EF 70-200 f2.8L performs very well in my experience, and in the newest version, Canon have made the aperture blades so that they make a more rounded opening, which they claim makes background blur smoother. I'd say that it is at least as good and maybe even better than my 80-200 Vario Elmar. - --Jim - ----- Original Message ----- From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 10:54 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] More digital comments > First off, Jim, you know full well that I have NEVER said modern Leica > optics don't bring any value to photography; the latest aspheric M > lenses are among the best 35 mm lenses available, particularly in terms > of flare suppression. I do not believe, however, believe the claims of > people say they can look at slides on a light table and see the > difference between Leica slides and those shot with pro Canon or Nikon > lenses. > > Also...The main reason I shoot Leica M is because it is the only true > pro-quality rangefinder body available since the demise of the Nikon and > Contax RFs. I have little doubt that if Nikon still made the SP - or > it's modern, matrix metered, equivalent, I'd be shooting Leica. But were > that the case, my guess is there wouldn't still be a Leica to shoot > with. > > But the bottom line is that I DO shoot with Leica Ms, like the results I > get, but I am the Leica equivalent of an Easter Catholic or a Passover > Jew; I belong to the congregation but I don't worship regularly. > ;-) > > B. D. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Jim Laurel > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 1:35 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] More digital comments > > > BD, if you don't believe that Leica optics bring any value to > photography, why do you bother to use them at all? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 9:38 AM > Subject: RE: [Leica] More digital comments > > > > Whatevah!:-)(Wonder if the large, red, script L in the corner of each > > Leica slide helped you make your picks!:-) ) > > > > Best > > B. D. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of John > > Collier > > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 12:02 PM > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > Subject: [Leica] More digital comments > > > > > > As you all know, I am a die-hard slide user; and, amazingly enough, my > > > family and friends like slide shows. YMMV. Last night a friend was > > over showing slides from Easter Island and in the mix were a few b&w > > digital images. He used a Canon G3 in raw mode which were converted to > > > TIFFs and then outputted to slides. What can I say, I was impressed. > > They were not good but they weren't bloody awful either -- remember > > these are enlarged to 4 feet by 6 feet. Images with large elements and > > > not too much fine detail looked OK even good. Images with lots of fine > > > detail came off as somewhat fuzzy. > > > > I am not about to rush out and switch to digital but possibly the > > technology only has to improve through a couple more generations > > before it would give pretty good results; maybe even excellent > > results. As those of you who push a lot of film through your cameras > > know, Leicas look cheap compared to film and processing bills. Now all > > > we need is a good digital camera with a M viewfinder! Please!! > > > > John Collier > > > > PS: As an overall impression, comparing the same slide film but not > > locations or photographer, I thought that Leica images looked better. > > Sorry for throwing that into the pot BD... > > > > -- > > 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 > > -- > 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 - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html