Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/10/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:44 AM 10/20/96 -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >So whether Pop Photog's lens test are more accurate or better thought >out than BAS or ColorFoto's is relatively inconsequential as long as >they are honest, give the parameters they are testing, and are >consistent in methodology. I'm more interested in what the photo >editors have to say about how the lenses produce an image than >with lines/mm numbers or contrast numbers. True, but Pop Photo is rather slavishly enslaved to advertisers, like Peterson's Photographic is, as well. I am a friend of David Brooks, who used to be editor of Petersons. (He lives in Eugene, OR., now. Which reminds me, Bob Rosen, I'm working on a reply to your message on the subject of Eugene!) And he is rather critical of what Peterson's has turned into - an advertorial rag that is in no way objective in relation to the products they review. I find it disgusting. >one sometimes. Anything produced by Leica has been generally speaking >a very superior optic, same for most of the Nikon AI-S series and >Zeiss lenses. They each have their different qualities which is why >it's so much fun to work with each of them. That's for sure! =========== Eric Welch Grants Pass, OR Ever notice how fast a Mac runs? Neither did I.