Re: [Leica] JB, filters, flames, and technique

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Ted,

Thanks for a very refreshing post, as usual.  My quote you refered to
was in the middle of a post of mine arguing that there is some waste of
energy to go on arguing about the 'superiority' or 'awesomeness' of
brand lines one compared to the other. I find that debate gathers more
misinformation and irrationality than communication about verifiable
facts.

Your criterium is impossible to attack: there is no alternative to the
Noctilux anywhere in the world right now. And the options that might get
near it (Canon f1 or the best f1.2 offers from others) are not
necessarily cheaper. Anyway they do not fit on a rangefinder...

My own Leica criteria are based on the functionnalities the system
brings compared to the price it costs. There are quite a few things that
distinguish the M line from what is available on the market apart from
so-called 'awesome' glass. The fact that that glass is generally
recognized as of high quality is simply reassuring when paying the bill
and examining the end results: any failure is solely on the side of the
user, not on the side of the gear.

My recurrent (and boring for others) point of friction here is when
discussing the reality of the competitive advantage that would be
brought by a similar level of investment in the R line compared to other
SLR options available on the market. 

I am quite aware you use that SLR line as well, next to your M system.
But I do not believe you argue that it brings you a verifiable
competitive advantage in imaging quality compared to other SLR choices
you could have made: you seem to use because you like it and because it
provides you with a satisfying crop of images.

For potential buyers, there is quite a difference between that and
statements arguing that the competitive advantage provided by the system
is easily recognisable, even in printed media.


Friendly regards
Alan
Ted Grant wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, 24 Nov 1998 07:27:57 +0100 Alan Ball writes:
> >
> >>So, stuck beteween the usage of the meaningless "awesome" qualifier by
> >>fanatical users, and the contradictions between the various test results
> >>from the various labs, we are condemned to make purchasing choices that
> >>might not always be the most rational ones. >>>>>>>>
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> In most cases when one is asked about a lens that I have worked with over
> the years or done tests for Leica, I give advice not because I'm a
> "fanatic" but simply because IMHO that's what happens when I use the lens.
> 
> What I see here so often is folks asking for advice about a lens then get
> umpteen dozen responses from various users who may or may not have any more
> experience than how many lines per mm instead of real time use in shooting
> under many different conditions and light.
> 
> I'm sure you are well aware that I'm a champion of the Noctilux.....but
> only if you are going to use it wide open or nearly so. Quite frankly I
> think anyone buying a Noctilux and then consistantly stopping down a half
> dozen stops is a fool for wasting their money when they can damn near buy
> two slower lenses for the price of the Nocti.
> 
> Long before the LUG was invented and online thingies like this, I never had
> anyone to ask about lenses as we see regularly here.  My criteria for
> buying a lens was very simple....."How fast is it?" As that was all that
> counted and I knew if it was Leitz it was going to be great.
> 
> I'm sure I made mistakes with this formula and may well have faired better
> with the wonderful technical informatation supplied by Erwin through his
> fine tests and diagnosis of today.
> 
> My usual advice on lens purchase is...."what do you want to shoot? Where do
> you want to shoot, indoor or outdoor? Under what light conditions do you
> expect to do the majority of your photography?"  Once a photographer
> answers those questions they can almost make their own decision what to
> buy.
> 
> Lenses are like women in the eye of the beholder, some ar "gorgeous and
> some are dogs!" And for the ladies on the LUG please insert "Men" where
> appropriate! :)
> 
> ted