Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: other leica lenses...
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:23:05 -0500

Usually, but not exclusively.  I use Leicas for the bodies, not the lenses.
 If I lost my M6s, and could only replace them with some totally redesigned
modern M7, chances are that I would trade in my lenses.   Alternatively,  I
wouldn't dream of trying to fit a Leica lens onto any of my other Japanese
cameras, even if it were possible.  The alternative optics are simply not
that significantly inferior to make that big a fuss over, IMHO.

And a photograph is just a photograph.  There is not such thing as "Leica"
photographs, or "nikon" photographs, etc.    There has to be more to the
content of a photograph then microscopic clues as to which optical system
produced it.  Otherwise, what is the point to photography?

Again, IMHO.

Dan C.  (just having one of those days)
- -----
Hey, Dan - You may be having "one of those days," but it sure sounds
rational to me. Yes, the Leica lenses are terrific, but the beauty of the M
is the M - the rangefinder, the size, the heft, the lack of noise - despite
recent complaints - the feeling that it belongs in your hand and will remain
there, functioning, as long as your hand is function...

And, to paraphrase you and Gertrude Stein, "A photograph is a photograph is
a photograph...While a Leica photograph is nothing but a photograph of a
Leica." :-)

B. D.

At 08:49 AM 12-03-99 -0800, Jim wrote:
>One usually buys Leica "for the lenses", not the other way around.
>
>If you photograph using non-Leica lenses on a Leica, are they still a
>"Leica photographs?"