Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/24

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

Subject: [Leica] The IIIF still works
From: john at (John McMaster)
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:24:40 +1200
References: <> <> <>

Making lenses to suit smaller size sensors is easier than larger ones, I
believe that the 'blad V Series are not too good with the best digital backs
but they wiped the floor with 120 film (as far as I am concerned)....


-----Original Message-----

But isn't Leica's crap better than other crap because it costs so much?
I'm talking actual bathroom crap. If it's made in the Leica factory by Leica
technicians, it must be better than regular crap because of where it came
Yes this is a bit of hyperbole but I'm with you Nathan. Leica-made crap with
Leica logos and all the frills plus the added expense HAS to be better than
crap made in other factories, right?
Some people are just way too heavily monetarily invested in their gear to
think that anything older or other branded than what they have could be

Phil Forrest

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 08:22:15 +0200
Nathan Wajsman <photo at> wrote:

> You really show your knowledge, Mark. The lens in question is not 
> branded Leica. You continually express opinions based on prejudice and 
> what you have read on Erwin's web page. I express opinions based on my 
> own experience with the equipment in question.
> On Jul 24, 2011, at 1:42 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
> > That a lens made by Panasonic with a Leica logo on it is "at least 
> > as good" as a real Leica lens costing thousands would be not really 
> > any consensus but your very entitled opinion.
> > 
> > I got involved years ago with Leica not because I thought the German 
> > Mark or clever marketing whatever inflated its worth beyond all 
> > sensibilities but that the stuff was really worth what it cost.
> > This played out very soon to be true and I have the 16x20 darkroom 
> > prints to prove it.
> > 
> > 
> > Mark William Rabiner
> > Photography
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> From: Nathan Wajsman <photo at>
> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at>
> >> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 00:38:52 +0200
> >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at>
> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] The IIIF still works
> >> 
> >> Except that there are lenses out there made by people other than 
> >> Leica (e.g. the 1.7/20mm Panasonic or some of the Voigtlander
> >> lenses) that do cost hundreds not thousands and that are at least 
> >> as good as Leica's own offerings.
> >>
> >> 
> >> On Jul 23, 2011, at 10:13 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Leica has as a business model the concept of making higher quality 
> >>> lenes than its 35mm format competition so it starts with a price 
> >>> point a magnitude higher than the rest.  5 grand not 500 clams. 
> >>> With its customers willing to pay for that kind of quality they 
> >>> can make a lens of that quality. They have glass choices a
> >>> 500 dollar lens does not have and they can make the construction 
> >>> of the lens to higher tolerances. One would think some day just 
> >>> for fun the people at Canon or Nikon could come out with a 5 grand 
> >>> 35mm 1.4 lens but they seem to feel that is not their business 
> >>> model mission statement.  They could of course do so and that 
> >>> optic would compete directly against Leica's output. Perhaps 
> >>> besting some of them. It might make the rest of their lens choices 
> >>> seem cheap in comparison. As yet if your paying 5 grand for a lens 
> >>> from Canon Nikon you're getting one that looks like a bazooka.
> >>> 
> >>> It took me ten years go amass ten Leica M lenses. I count not pick 
> >>> one up on a  whim as a current job was going to pay for it and I 
> >>> already head the rent in. it had to be an ongoing financial 
> >>> consideration lasting about a year. And it was always I felt worth 
> >>> it.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Mark William Rabiner
> >>> Photography
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>> From: Paul Roark <roark.paul at>
> >>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at>
> >>>> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 08:31:37 -0700
> >>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] The IIIF still works
> >>>> 
> >>>> Mark Rabiner <mark at> wrote:
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>> Optical science has not stood still ...
> >>>> 
> >>>> I had an interesting discussion with a Canon technical rep some 
> >>>> years ago.  He made the point that most R&D went into not making 
> >>>> lenses sharper per se, but rather making them "affordable" while 
> >>>> still good enough.  That reality even affects Leica -- although 
> >>>> at a higher price-performance point.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Along this line, it appears one of the main advances may be in 
> >>>> making molded aspherics better.  One simply can't make a top 
> >>>> notch, very wide or very fast lens with only spherical elements, 
> >>>> and the cost of grinding one aspheric at a time is even out of 
> >>>> Leica's cost structure. I think what we'll see, going forward, is 
> >>>> the move to more and more aspherics -- not just a single element 
> >>>> per optic.  In line with this thinking, I'd guess that the slower 
> >>>> telephotos, where aspherics are not needed, would be the area 
> >>>> where the older Leica lenses can best match the newer ones (at 
> >>>> least in a low flare situation).
> >>>> 
> >>>> I think one of the advantages the M series will continue to enjoy 
> >>>> in terms of performance is the ability of the designers to ignore 
> >>>> the requirements of AF and IS, which has to be a huge part of 
> >>>> current optical design for the mainstream companies.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Paul

In reply to: Message from mark at (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] The IIIF still works)
Message from photo at (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] The IIIF still works)
Message from photo.forrest at (Philip Forrest) ([Leica] The IIIF still works)