Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/08

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: 90mm's
From: walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson)
Date: Thu Jun 8 07:00:55 2006
References: <9b678e0606051912q57707ab2sfec489dc95b8072a@mail.gmail.com> <C0AA6092.11820%bdcolen@comcast.net> <9b678e0606061947j5012dbe6l5d12c4288bdf1689@mail.gmail.com> <4486FB53.9040109@waltjohnson.com> <9b678e0606071816h48d7f8cese59dcfdded1e1df5@mail.gmail.com> <003301c68aaa$afa1fca0$a302a8c0@ted>

AMEN.....Except of course the Noctilooney bit :-D

Ted Grant wrote:

> 90mm lens. Big deal! ;-)
>
> I find all these discussions quite amazing simply because in my time I 
> bought a lens inrelation to my work. It was like this:
>
> I bought a Leica lens because it was fast as it could be, that was it. 
> Did I sweat a dog over whether it was as sharp as something else? 
> Nope, it was Leica, fast and I bought! Nothing else mattered!
>
> As in any other lens or camera, I just wanted to do my work quickly, 
> efficiently and and hopefully to be given more assignments to feed my 
> family. That my friends was the criteria for anything photographic in 
> equipment.
>
> And that's all that mattered, the right tool!  As I see these many 
> lens bits back and forth I realize very few of you people have ever 
> had to rely on your livehood through the camera or lens in hand. Quite 
> interesting indeed.
>
> Because my career has always been photojournalistic in nature, 
> documentary, news, magazine features, evolving into more in-depth 
> books. I've never gone through the emotional details some of you folks 
> appear to do over equipment. Simply because it was, has always been, 
> still is, the visual effect of the final image that counted far more 
> than the quirks and quarks of a "lens."
>
> I believe I've said in the past, the most important thing for me 
> deciding what lens to buy ...... "how fast is it?" That's all, as in 
> there wasn't any back and forth dilemma about imagery effects of the 
> Noctilux, simply because it was as fast as one could get! Bought it, 
> used it extensively, still have it and obviously if the people in 
> Solms are clever enough to make a digital camera to allow it's proper 
> use on a digital camera it may well be used again. ;-)  Maybe?
>
> But it's quite amazing how much time people waste knocking themselves 
> out over fat, thin, skinny, long, short or whatever things that have 
> appeared on screen over one simple 90mm lens. It absolutely amazes me 
> when you all would be better off out shooting pictures with whatever 
> 90mm lens you have .
>
> WHY!
>
> Because all that matters in the end is.... the beauty of the 
> photograph you've taken! Quite frankly with whatever the hell lens you 
> use!
>
> Not whether it's fat, thin, made in Canada, Spain, Germany or 
> wherever! It's the "final content in the photograph that counts," 
> that's all.
>
> Some of you people are breathing way to hard over nothing! Relax go 
> take pictures! ;-)
>
> ted
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>


Replies: Reply from s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's--- speaking of...)
In reply to: Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)
Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re: 90mm's)