Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
>Your reasoning seems to be: some Leica lenses are bad because Leica has =
not
>published the MTF graphs. All conclusions of Chasseurs d'Image are right
>because no one contested them officially. In the same vein I could say:
>Leica has never disputed my conclusions, so they must be correct and tru=
e.
>Of course this kind of arguing cannot be proved nor disproved.
>Erwin
>
Yes, I do think that some Leica lenses are optically overvalued.For
instance in the M system : noctilux (oops !), summilux 50, summicron
90,tele-elmar.All these lenses have an old optical design while films hav=
e
been hugely improved. But Leica is now on the road again with marvelous
lenses : aspherical and apo.
It is impossible for a firm to acknowledge directly that one of its produ=
ct
is bad. For instance Leica says to me that "the tele-elmar 135 is not as
good as the apo 180"(sic).You have to decode the message and it is quite
clear.
But it is still more impossible for a consumer (and you are and I am a
consumer)to know if a product is good or not. That is the "information
asymetry" :the firm knows the quality and you are in a veil of ignorance.
So it is very important to have a "free" press as a counterpower. The pre=
ss
can oppose a controversial position to the firm ideology (=3D"Our product=
s
are the best in the world", and so on).=20
That is why I don't understand your position as a consumer of Leica
products. We ought to be critical.We ought to help the free press to
develop a free speech.
My opinion is that many "Leica fans" are alienated ( it is not an affront=
)
in the sense given by the french psychiatrist Lacan : they adopt the spee=
ch
of the others ("l'ali=E9nation, c'est le discours de l'Autre").
I was also alienated in the past but now I am recovering.
Dominique