[Leica] Erwin's Latest

[gregj.lorenzo at shaw.ca (GREG LORENZO)]

Scott McLoughlin writes in part: 

> Well, I imagine that many of the photogs of days of yore were
> using the best equipment/lenses available to them (or to their
> budgets).
> 
> But so what?  After what I perceive to be a many decades long mad
> dash toward better and better optics - a good fast 50, better coatings
> and flare control, decent wides with minimum distortion, ever better
> corner-to-corner resolution, nuance such as the color rendition of
> Zeiss lenses and coatings, better contrast - blah blah and on and on
> and on.
> 
> Why in the hell should such a quest end now? Why should we
> believe that photogs shouldn't or don't really care anymore? Because
> Canon/Nikon are doing well pushing the umpteenth version of the
> moderate wide-to-short tele "fast" f2.8 zoom? Is it because a lens
> designed for and built to tight tolerances is too pricey to sell at
> Best Buy or even the local "pro photo" shop with today's labor
> prices?  Who knows?
> 

I've seen nothing that suggests that the quest has changed except for the
odd post on the Lug. People still want the best image quality that they can 
afford
not-with-standing some of the stuff you read here. Assertions in the past on 
the Lug to the effect that a coke bottle's bottom would give the same 
digital image quality as
the best available lenses have proven to have been just so much hot air, as 
will the 
any camera/glass is good enough chant.

Regards,

Greg