Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/04/25

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

Subject: [Leica] Digital vs Analog and lenses
From: bd at bdcolenphoto.com (B. D. Colen)
Date: Fri Apr 25 13:31:58 2008

I think you're absolutely right about the lenses, David, but I don't think
it's limited to "digital" lenses. I believe that lens quality - at least in
terms of image quality (build is another matter entirely) - has improved so
dramatically over the past several decades that now, as you note, even most
inexpensive lenses are "good." In the past, there was much more variation in
quality, and there were more 'okay' and 'passable' lenses that were good for
certain looks or certain kinds of photography. Now lenses are either good,
or they are so gawdawful you want to toss them away.

As to the comment about digital bodies, I'm not so sure. I think that once
we got to 5 mgp sensors that would produce good images, we started to have
cameras that are fun to go back to, and, in fact, may even be better for
certain uses than newer cameras. Where you're absolutely correct is in terms
of obsolescence - these older cameras will be irreparable soon, if they
aren't already, so they're only useful until they fail.

B. D.


On 4/25/08 3:56 PM, "David Rodgers" <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote:

> 
> One thing I've noticed in digital is that lenses are either good or bad.
> It's just like a byte. It's either high or low, on or off, good or bad.
> I can put a lens on a digital camera and size it up pretty quickly.
> Pretty much all the new zooms are decent. They have to be. Even the
> inexpensive ones are good...though slow.
> 
> With film lens quality seems more analogous to analog, just like film
> itself. Lenses get better or worse. But there's not such a distinct
> cutoff. It's not "sharp or unsharp". It's "sharper or less sharp". Or a
> lens may have other desirable characteristics.
> 
> It just seems that with digital a lens either has it or it doesn't.
> There's no middle ground.
> 
> Same with cameras. With digital newer will always be better. I can't
> imagine anyone every going retro with digital, like a person might still
> today have fun with a Leica SM, and even turn out photos that rival
> those from newer cameras. "Classic" is likely a word that will never be
> attached to a digital camera. At least not in the film sense. Digital
> retro will be nothing more than a software plugin.
> 
> DaveR 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] Digital vs Analog and lenses)