[Leica] Leica superiority or not.

[jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)]

What is more important - the technical quality of a photograph or the
artistic merits? Most of this obsessing about lenses, sensor types, camera
bodies, etc are all about the former, because you can measure it. The
latter, though far more important, cannot be measured at all, so is
ignored!!!

In no other art form that I am aware of are the tools discussed ad nauseum,
and nobody discusses, or cares about, the end product at all. Even in
music, where tools are important, they are relegated to a distant second
place with respect to the actual performance/recording.

Cheers
Jayanand


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Frank Dernie
<Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com>wrote:

> Resolution is only one part of what we enjoy in a lens. It is the easiest
> to measure, though is usually measured under one set of not necessarily
> relevant conditions. Other aspects of lens performance such as colour and
> boke are less easily measured but easily seen, IMHO.
> On top of that there are issues such as robustness, size, weight, ease of
> handling, convenience of focusing and so forth to consider.
> I use and enjoy other cameras and lenses but I -do- consider Leica to be
> superior, though perhaps not by a huge amount in the case of a few
> excellent competitors.
> YMMV
> FD
>
> On 27 Jun, 2013, at 01:31, lrzeitlin at aol.com wrote:
>
> > Enough of this praise of Leica superiority. It is tiresome even on the
> LUG. For most practical purposes Leicas are not superior to other cameras.
> >
> >
> > The limit to image quality, especially for images presented on the
> internet, is set by the viewing device. In the case of an HD TV, a 35 mm
> full frame image need only have 45 lines/mm to appear perfectly sharp. Even
> if the image is viewed on the top quality 27" Mac monitor it need only have
> 60 l/mm to appear sharp. These image resolution standards are only slightly
> greater than those that the old Modern Photography magazine rated as
> minimally acceptable. Every camera I own, no matter how cheap or how old
> can meet the resolution standard required by modern image viewing systems.
> Every Leica lens ever made, except possibly the old Thambar portrait lens,
> will exceed the minimum resolution criteria. By actual test my widely
> disparaged 75 year old Elmar 35 mm f3.5, Leica's first wide angle, resolved
> 68 l/mm.?
> >
> >
> > Some zealots on the LUG seem to obsess over the latest and greatest
> Leica lenses and the imaging characteristics and the size of electronic
> sensors. While these may be interesting topics in themselves, they have
> almost nothing to do with the pictures posted on the LUG and viewed on a
> computer screen. The best is the enemy of "good enough." Get out there and
> take meaningful pictures. Don't blather endlessly about technical
> perfection.
> >
> >
> > Larry Z
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>