[Leica] Getting what you pay for, Leica vs Zeiss, etc

[dnygr at cshore.com (dnygr)]

This message was originally HTML formatted.  View in a HTML capable client 
to see the original version.\r\n\r\nThis post concerns the discussion about 
Leica vs Zeiss, German vs Japanese.

Disclosure: I am a dedicated Leica uses. I use it 98% of the time. I love 
the quality of Leica glass.

I do a lot of photography in poor light. Here is where I start to have a 
problem with Leica. Not with the lenses.
The problem is not the quality of the lenses. They perform well.

It's the Leica sensor. I find the colors are a problem. They are off. I used 
a Canon 5D I found its color in those situations
to be better. I still prefer the Leica however. The size of the Canon annoys 
me. The large "L" pro lenses annoy me.

A friend suggested I use the simple 2.0 Canon lens. Compared to the L and 
Leica lenses it was a cheap purpose. The thing works
darn well. It isn't bulky and the colors in the dark remain good.

I may try using Aperture instead of Photoshop with the Leica. That may solve 
some of the color problems. 

But having shot with the Canon, I feel I got a lot for my money with the 35 
and still have a lot of change in my pocket. 
I feel the Leica is less bulky to use. I don't like the mirror delay of the 
Canon. I like Leica lens quality--the three dimensionality. 
The Canon however gives me more than I would suspect I'd get for $300.

Cheers--Doug