Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Tue, 29 Dec 1998, Dominique PELLISSIER wrote: >If sharpness is not the main criterium, why buy Leica lenses ? Nikon or >Canon lenses are 3 or 4 times less expensive. Several LUGgers have answered this extremely well. For myself, I'm more productive with Leica equipment: the balance of "sharpness" whatever that is with contrast, color saturation, lack of flare, pleasant bokeh, fully usable maximum apertures, consistent handling and reliability under adverse field conditions found in Leica-R lenses suits my working style better than the other equipment I've used. My all-time favorite lens for wildlife photography is the 400 f/6.8 Telyt which was designed in the late 1960s. At that time its optical performance was considered the best available. I'm still delighted with the 400's imaging properties. Several modern lenses from several sources are "sharper", but none have come anywhere near the f/6.8 Telyt's field handling properties. The handling, combined with the excellent imaging, are what make the Telyt more productive than the N**** equipment I had previously used. Doug Herr Sacramento