Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Even though Leica had the best optics, they did not keep up with the technical advances of Nikon, then Canon in order to remain the professional choice. The modern "system" approach of the Japanese camera companies overwhelmed superior optics. Also, I feel that the public has "dumbed down" in their appreciation of quality photography, especially in magazines. "Good enough" works now, as evidenced by some of the truly atrocious national magazines use of early digital photography. Also, just compare any high school or college yearbook from the 50-60's to today's student work. The quality of the photography, mostly done then with 4x5 press cameras is awesome. Today, I am waiting for the real advancement in digital photography. Although very capable in capturing images, I am disappointed that most "pro" digital SLR camera bodies are still designed around film mode - much like early automobiles that still had the mud guards up front to keep the horses from splashing on the occupants. Technology leapfrogs, and Leica got "leaped" a long time ago. I still hope they can innovate something that will make us Leica lovers cheer about. And I still assert that back when a majority really appreciated great photography, Leica glass made a difference in the negative, the print and event the magazine page. For a more current example, the photographer who covered the elections for the special issue on Bush and Kerry (Newsweek, I think, but that's a dirty word now and another story, too) - he used Leicas to capture some great photographs. The first time I saw the article, from years of experience with printing Leica B&W, I instinctively knew they were shot with Leica optics. Although other manufacturers are closing the gap in optical performance today, with Leica lenses, there is a difference, but not enough for most pros to appreciate in contrast to the better SLR systems approach they get with Nikon and Canon. Gary Todoroff (Tree LUGger) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+datamaster=northcoastphotos.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+datamaster=northcoastphotos.com@leica-users.org]On Behalf Of B. D. Colen Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 11:27 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: RE: [Leica] Leica R lenses on Canon Digital Bodies It strikes me, Gary, that if the quality differences were as striking as some on this list believe, then virtually every professional photographer worth calling professional would have been shooting with Leica - and would still be doing all his or her film shooting with Leica. And that simply was not, and is not now the case. If there are real quality differences to see, they will be seen in the darkroom, or through a loupe on a lightbox - but that's not how people view photos in the real work. While there are many reasons for wanting to shoot with Leica equipment - including the quality of most of the modern M lenses - I'm struck that I've never heard anyone say, "Boy, that Jim Nachtwey sure has a great eye - too bad he doesn't shoot with Leicas." ;-) B. D. >When I was a darkroom printer and before I was a Leica owner, I consistently >saw differences in negative quality from the professionals at KameraBIld - >fine photographers all. My research proved that the negatives with that >wonderful "sparkle" all came from Leicas. There was a definite difference. >Within a couple of months, I had my own Leica. >Gary Todoroff > >P.S. let's critique ideas or photos, B.D., not the fine members on this >list. > >-----Original Message----- >B. D. Colen >Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:05 AM >To: Leica Users Group >Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica R lenses on Canon Digital Bodies > > >Sorry to hurt your feelings, Mark - When I was shooting film, I did >so with a combination of Leica glass and Nikon glass - I have used >both on and off for more than 40 years. And, no, I don't think you'd >be able to tell the difference between my Leica images and my Nikon >images - I know that I can't, with the exception of those shot with >the Leica 21 ASPH for the M and those shot with wide Nikons, which do >not begin to measure up. > >And, btw, I don't claim to be master printer, so I don't know what my >saying that the black and white prints produced by an HP printer >compare to custom RC prints has to do with a discussion of the work >of Sabastio Salgado; I'd step in front of an oncoming bus before I'd >deign to compare my prints, or any of my photography, to Salgados. ;-) > > > >-- >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/2005 > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- B. D. Colen Sr. Communications Officer for University Science Office of the Vice President for Government, Community, and Public Affairs Harvard University 617-495-7821 617-413-1224 - cell bd_colen@harvard.edu _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/2005