Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Art, It's an interesting point. It's also interesting to think about different quality criteria and what has improved and how much, and then what has not improved so much since the times of HCB. Just a few quick thoughts, but a shutter, shutter speed, film load/wind/rewind, aperture setting and a meter (presuming a hand held meter) hasn't changed all that much, I imagine. Some of the earlier Summicron 50's are still cherished for their high resolution and lower contrast for B&W photography. I wonder how much build quality has changed either way since the 40's and 50's. Automation has certainly improved, and modern zoom lens technology, while I'm no afficianado, seem quite remarkable to me. Scott Peterson, Arthur G CIV SEA 02 wrote: >B. D. Colen wrote (in part), "As to the comments about the Canon lenses - >It's not that photographers won't 'notice,' it's that real photographers >know it just doesn't matter - what matters is getting a meaningful image, >not the technical accomplishment." > >And Mark Rabiner responded (in part), "BD feels threatened by people >talking on the Leica users group about how much they value their Leicas." > >I value my Leicas, and I have no idea of what B.D. may or may not feel, but >I would like to re-frame what I take to be his point in a way that seems to >me indisputable. Three quarters of a century ago, Cartier-Bresson was >taking better photographs with his technologically deprived (i.e., by >today's standards) Leicas than I'm taking today with the latest electronic >bodies and aspherical lenses. And if using equipment as antiquated as his >would enable me to take photographs as good as his, I'd trade my modern >equipment for it in an instant. > >Art Peterson > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >