Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think your final sentence sums it all up, Jeffery - "That's my perception, and I'm sticking to it." All the reams and reams of excrement that get posted here and elsewhere about people being able to pick out Leica/Nikon/Canon/McDonalds slides on a light table; about Zeiss lenses being superior to Leica lenses for shooting ItalianAmerican subjects on cloudy days; about this bit of glass being clearly superior to that bit of glass, ultimately come down to personal perception. And the personal perception, I suspect, comes down to what the individual's particular photoheros, Dads, Moms, or Grandpas used - to say nothing of how much money the perceiver has invested in which system. My perception is that the 35 1.4 ASPH M and 28 f2 ASPH M are the two best lenses I have ever used, bar none. On the other hand, the Zeiss lenses for the G1 - a crappy body - were pretty awsome. :-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Jeffery Smith Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 12:07 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] BESSA R3A or M7 Also subjectively speaking, I have felt that my Zeiss lenses have performed better with color film while Leica has performed better with B&W. I know that sounds stupid, but the contrast seems better (richer) in Zeiss photos, and definition (resolution) seems better in the Leica photos. I don't always like sharper (and definitely dislike sharpened!). To go out on a limb, CV lenses seem more Leica-like, and Konica lenses seem more Zeiss-like. That's my perception, and I'm sticking to it. ;-) Jeffery On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 08:55:04 -0800, Slobodan Dimitrov <s.dimitrov@charter.net> wrote: > Subjectively speaking, I always felt that my Zeiss 120 lenses > outperformed my leica lenses. But then I always placed that perception > on the sheer film volume creating that effect. S. Dimitrov > > > On Jan 8, 2005, at 7:59 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote: > > > Zeiss has taken the remarkable stand in stating (in Q&A fashion) > > that it believes that the lenses will outperform those already on > > the market (I assume that they were talking about Leica et al). > > That's a pretty big statement to back up. I would imagine that it > > might take more than a month of R&D to design and construct a bevy > > of those lenses. > > > > Jeffery > > > > > > On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 05:55:38 -0800, Doug Herr <telyt@earthlink.net> > > wrote: > >> on 1/8/05 3:34 AM, Bill Marshall at billgem@hotmail.com wrote: > >> > >>> Zeiss did talk about focus shift in its lead up to Photokina & it > >>> is again mentioned on it Zeiss Ikon website. Specifically, it says > >>> that its lenses are designed to "minimize focus shift." > >> > >> AFAIK, focus shift is caused by residual spherical aberation. > >> > >> Doug Herr > >> Birdman of Sacramento > >> http://www.wildlightphoto.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 > > > > > Slobodan Dimitrov > Photography > > _______________________________________________ > 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