Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D. As a general statement I agree that across the board it would be hard to tell which lens took which image; especially if sent through a scanner. That said, some lenses have extremely unique signatures. So, a 85-90 F2.8 would be hard to distinguish which is which, but the 50 F1.2-F1's have very different looks. Sonnar design lenses also have a signature look especially near wide open. My 75 Biotar has a vastly different look from the Helios which is very different from my 75 Summilux which is different from my 85 Sonnar which is different from my 90 Summicron. Each of the 75 to 90mm lenses does something different with light and can be creatively used. Long telephoto's can be the same. The Leica Telyts look different than the Leica APO's which are slightly different than the Canon long class and a lot different from the Nikon glass. I think as digital sensors become finer pitched the differences in lenses will become more pronounced and once again great lens designs will become profitable to create and produce. Don dorysrus@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of B. D. Colen Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 5:45 PM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Canon digital equivalent to R7 and 100mm APO? A VERY important point, Eric. For all the babble about Leica glass, and how people can spot Leica slides on a light box and yadah, yadah, yadah, I think it really comes down to how the particular camera enhances, or doesn't enhance, your shooting style and vision. The truth is that any of us shooting hand held, particularly those of us shooting black and white at high iso, are in no way getting every bit of benefit out of Leica glass, or any good glass for that matter. Canon makes some terrific lenses. Nikon makes some terrific lenses. Hell, Olympus makes some terrific lenses. ;-) And in very very few cases can anyone tell the difference between the images shot with those different lenses if they are used under real-life, handheld conditions. B. D. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Eric Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 8:58 AM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: [Leica] Re: Canon digital equivalent to R7 and 100mm APO? Eric: >What lenses come close to leica performace? > >Or is this all blasphemy? I have both the Canon EF 50/1.4 & 85/1.8. Which come close to Leica? Depends on your work flow. I scan my negatives and then work with the digital files for output. Perhaps if I used a drum scanner, I could see more difference, but at a mere 4000 dpi, the scanner can't capture all the resolution that either my Canon or Leica lenses can. In my workflow, my scanner is the great equalizer. That said, at the end of day looking back, when I select the favorite images from my body of work, the Leica ones are usually the front runners. Has nothing to do with performance of the lens. Probably more the mindset I'm in when using my Leica. -- Eric http://canid.com/ _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information