Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica
From: msadat at gmail.com (mehrdad)
Date: Wed Dec 22 08:41:24 2004
References: <3459B544-53EB-11D9-8C95-0003934599E0@iprimus.com.au> <p0600107abdeef68f1fc0@gpsy.com> <80E3435B-5418-11D9-AF2D-003065B7587A@interlink.es> <p06001089bdef40782761@gpsy.com> <005701c4e83e$982cb660$3201a8c0@AUG01>

though ziess is a good name when it comes to lenses and quality, the
pricing 2/3 leica prices are too much, for "little" money you can by
voiltander lenses, and whoever is looking @ the ziess leica prices
range, i think leica  wins as it is proven,

if they can set the price point 1/2 of leica prices, they will have a
chance, pls listen ziess ikon people on the list


On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:55:00 +0100, Ruben <ruben@rhodos.dk> wrote:
> Karen
> 
> Thanks for sharing the news - I was happy to hear about the OOF/Bokeh - do
> not care much for mtf  i can not see anyway but a 25 and a 50 at 1/3 of the
> price sounds great :-)
> 
> Ruben
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Karen Nakamura" <mail@gpsy.com>
> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica
> 
> > >
> >>Im asking to myself what's the point to compare so close things such
> >>these.
> >
> > On the contrary, the ZI lenses are testing at the same level as the Leica
> > lenses but at one third the price. And the reviewers are using them in
> > conditions taht even Ted Grant would approve -- shooting from the shadow
> > side in heavily backlit portrait situations.  They do say that even the
> > highest end zooms would flare out in these situations but the ZI and 
> > Leica
> > ASPH do wonderfully.
> >
> > They do mention bokeh and OOF (to reference another question). They say
> > they are roughly equivalent but the ZI is softer while the ASPH generally
> > are a bit harsher and thicker.
> >
> > These were all subjective tests using real photgraphs and real models, by
> > the way. Not MTF or lab tests. And contrary to what you say, you can tell
> > the difference even in a magazine reproduction. All the lenses were 
> > tested
> > wide open. Stopped down, the reviewers say the difference disappears.
> >
> > All in all, I'm really excited by this news. If you're not interested,
> > then don't buy or read! :-)
> >
> >
> > Karen
> >
> > --
> > Karen Nakamura
> > http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


-- 
  -------------------------------------
  regards, mehrdad

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Reply from timatherton at theedge.ca (Tim Atherton) ([Leica] PrismPhoto - Victoria)
In reply to: Message from mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Message from lmc at interlink.es (Luis Miguel Castañeda) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Message from mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Message from ruben at rhodos.dk (Ruben) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)