Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/10/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Oct 7, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >> Yes, image quality too. I am sure for every Leica owner who claims >> Leitz fairy dust superiority, there is a G2 or other Zeiss glass >> owner >> who will dispute that. >> >> Galen Rowell shot Nikon glass and have his prints enlarged to 30x40" >> before digital existed. And that's with lowly cheap Japanese made >> glass. >> >> I love my Leica, but lets not go overboard. Most people do not need >> Leica, but most of us WANT Leica :-) >> > I love Nikon glass I use it every day it was the standard of the > industry > for decades when I started out in the 70's Leica glass is a whole lot > better. I wish I was using it instead I have to try to swing an M9. > Its not a bunch of hype and BS and the value of the German Mark > which makes > a 2000 dollar lens better to use than a 200 dollar lens or the > country in > which its made. Its the quality of the glass choices themselves. And > tolerances of how the glass element groups are put together. Its not a > German vs. Japan thing. Its a money thing. Or rather a market thing. > If > Nikon Canon wanted to build a 24 1.4 lens to compete with Leica I'm > sure > they could... or given the size of their potential market, better... or maybe they would buy out leica, to accomplish it... Steve > They don't choose to compete in such a small market. > > > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information