Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 22 de dic de 2004, at 16:22, Karen Nakamura wrote: > These were all subjective tests using real photgraphs and real models, > by the way. Subjective test are -imho- the most accurate tests for users as far as from I see it everything involved in photography but optic/electronic/mechanical design is just subjective. > Not MTF or lab tests. Im really glad to hear it. > And contrary to what you say, you can tell the difference even in a > magazine reproduction. Well, in fact that's just I was trying to say (sorry if I wasnt clear enough, english isnt my first language), I do prefer the pics [even a set suspiciously favourable to one side] instead a whole stack of MTF and related comments. > All in all, I'm really excited by this news. It's always great to have more than two choices... > If you're not interested, then don't buy or read! :-) Certainly I wont buy [ unemployed condition won't allow me to pay even 1/3 Leica price :( ] but they may be on my whishlist, even the Ikon, I do like its base length. > They do mention bokeh and OOF (to reference another question). They > say they are roughly equivalent but the ZI is softer while the ASPH > generally are a bit harsher and thicker. I never found the leica asph or pre-asph 'cron versions too smooth when lights are involved into the out of focus zone, in that case I always tought that zeiss lenses were doing it far much better. In the other hand -yet subjectively- I've preferred how the pre-asph crons photos looks rather than contax G series (to say anything similar) or even asph crons meanwhile asph are supposed to be better lenses... Thats why I do prefer to see pictures than the usual tests. Saludos ----------------------------------------- http://imaginarymagnitude.net/blog/