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 10:37:55 2004
References: <440b792d0412220843f7c9947@mail.gmail.com> <028701c4e84f$ebf949a0$6401a8c0@ccapr.com>

B.D, even though ziess has been around for a long time, they are a new
comer in this format (M) and i think for them to capture market and be
able to stay in it, the prices need to be around 1/2. i am interested
in this lenses but i want to buy a lens as good as leica for half the
price and i am sure you would too. so we have leica @ the hight end,
ziess @ middle and voitlander @ the low end. very very nice


On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:59:02 -0500, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> 
wrote:
> Sorry, Mehrdad, but this is the kind of thinking that's sinking Leica.
> First off, why would anyone be foolish enough to pay even 1/3 extra just
> to get the Leica name for lenses that are reportedly no better, and
> perhaps not quite as good? And why would they do that when they can get
> a name that means as much or more in the photography and optical world
> as the Leica name? We're not talking Cosina here, with good glass but
> mounts that are good, but not up to Leica quality. We're talking Zeiss -
> Zeiss of Capa, Zeiss of Eugene Smith, Zeiss of etc. etc. And if the
> lenses are as good or better than the comparable Leica lenses, and as
> well made....well...If you insist on paying 1/3 more, would you please
> instead consider buying the Zeiss lenses and sending me the difference?
> :-)
> 
> 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
> mehrdad
> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:44 AM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica
> 
> 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 _______________________________________________
> 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 mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Reply from rich815 at gmail.com (Richard Sintchak) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
In reply to: Message from msadat at gmail.com (mehrdad) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
Message from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)