Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/27

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

Subject: [Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM
From: chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford)
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:36:33 -0500

Mark, I am a professional artist. My fine prints have been exhibited widely
and I earn my living selling my photographs. I do not make 17x22 prints from
any 35mm camera's negs, that's what I have a Hasselblad for. Hell, my old
Mamiya 645 blows away my Leica in an 8x10. There's just so much you can get
from a tiny piece of film. Nost lenses for 35mm cameras are sharper than the
films most commonly used with them (eg. Tri-X)

If you looked at my negatives through a loupe, you couldn't tell what camera
made which. I've never had an art collector tell me that my prints from my
Olympus cameras are not sharp enough. Frankly the only people who give a
damn are people who fondle cameras. Professionals are too busy working and
earning a living and making images that please their clients to care.


-- 
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-424-0897

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com  My portfolio

http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com  My latest work!



On 2/27/10 6:09 PM, "Mark Rabiner" <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:

>> I bought my Leica for the exact opposite reason you did. I Like the crazy
>> rangefinder, it makes candid photography easier. My SLR system is Olympus
>> OM, with three OM-4T bodies. The OM-4T sucks for candid work because it 
>> has
>> a huge amount of lag between pushing the button and the shutter firing. I
>> put up with it for the incredible metering system and the OM lenses, which
>> are spectacular. My OM lenses are all very late models made in the last
>> years of OM production (they're a lot better than many of the earlier
>> Olympus lenses).
>> 
>> I have shot both Olympus and Leica on the same projects and no one can 
>> tell
>> the difference in the images between photos made with the OM 50mm f1.4 and
>> the 50mm Tabbed Summicron that I have.
>> 
> Ah so you're in it for the rangefinder. Glass is not the issue!
> Olympus = Leica but with no rangefinder.
> Photos? To me output wise that's just real vague as people use that term in
> the past decade and it means pretty much nothing. It means output.
> People want to show you  their "photos" and they pull out their Iphone.
> Does that mean a print of some kind or size? Uploads? Looking at images on
> your monitor you'd put on a Cd?
> I'm sure you  could have shot some with a credit card camera and no one
> would have noticed those looking any different either.
> Most of the people on this list would just assume shoot with 4/3's as full
> frame. Output seems not to be the issue.
> This unfortunately makes the input just as arbitrary.
> And in this case sure 1000 = 3000 usd.
> Olympus = Leica 
> 
> [Rabs]
> Mark William Rabiner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)
Reply from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Zeiss Wide Angle 35mm f/2 Biogon T* ZM)