Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/07/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Have to disagree with you on this one, Ted. No, no one has ever said, "great aspherics!." But lens aberrations can definitely detract from a photo. God knows many a person has looked at what is a really terrific photo and said, 'but it's fuzzy!" Or, "why does that look burry?" Granted, the people who say these things don't know squat about photography - usually. But the vast majority of the population - including the vast majority of educated, informed people - don't know squat about photography. They just know what they like. And show them a "decisive moment" that's sharp, contrasty and free of flare, and the same moment that's slightly fuzzy and veiled in flare, and you know which they are going to go for. None of this is to say that one should go crazy always paying more and more money to get the newest lens. Nor does it suggest that there aren't some images that are better for being a bit softer. It's just to say that people do notice these differences. B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Ted Grant Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:02 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] 35 Summilux Guys and gals, Really on this testing and which is better, best and what will give the best results have no relevance to the quality of the content! Ultimately the quality impact of the photograph is what it's all about!. Be the bokohee round or square, oblong lights and all the rest of this stuff means diddly when it comes down to the impact of the photograph. Maybe if you're shooting rocks, ferns and peeling paint, but in the real world of photojournalism, which I believe much of those shooting PAWS is kind of like, it's the impact! Not the sharpie lines etc. So save your film and time, just go take pictures of moments that move you to expose film and save the frustrations of which is better, best or igly! Whatever, ugly! aspheric or straight up ordinary...., it still comes down to what you put on film. I mean, after all has anyone ever said about one of your pictures, "WOW! Cool aspherical image!" I think not, as only people like us know what we're talking about and pretty nearly any aspherical lens is only really beneficial wide open to identical non aspheric focal length lens wide open. Generally once one stops down a tad the difference is negligible or non-existent!. If you have a smashing good picture there isn't one twiddly asph thing or non that's going to make it better. It's the light, eyes, the action and that's the bottom line! Screw the rest! :-) Go capture great moments with whatever lens you own. ted - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html