Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 11:07 AM 8/31/99 -0400, you wrote: >I suspect that Leica's approach is an expensive one. Without the high >resolution lower contrast images would look awful. Actually, Leica's lenses are not that outstanding in the resolution area. Some are, some aren't. They're all great, but not much more than the competition. They tend to have high contrast. You are mistaking subject contrast for lens contrast. That is, the ability to discriminate the edge of a line, not the differences in the highlights and shadows and the "local contrast" as Ansel Adams and other refer to it, or tonal modulation from one brightness level to another. That's contrast controlled via film and processing. Contrast in a lens is controlled in the designer's computer. A decent lens in terms of low resolution, but great in terms of high contrast, will tend to make pictures that look sharper than the other way around. Any lens test that says Leica lenses are, as a class, low contrast, needs to be fixed. Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch Okay, who put a stop payment on my reality check?