Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/13

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

Subject: [Leica] Response to Erwin's Posts
From: "Bruce Feldman" <brucef@waw.pdi.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 19:38:33 +0100

Erwin,

In the field of aesthetics, as you must know, philosophers have attempted to
answer the question, "What is beauty?"  Is it important to humans?  Is it
culturally determined or universal?  Does it exist in "reality" or in the
mind?

If we assume for the moment, that aesthetically oriented photographers
attempt to create or capture beauty (however defined), for the joy and
meaning it gives to them and others, then the most relevant questions in
regard to Leica lenses are as follows:

Is a modern Leica lens more capable of rendering beauty than an older one?
Or, is a modern Leica lens capable of rendering more beauty than an older
one?

In practical terms, would HC-B's shot of the top-hatted man jumping across
the puddle have been even more precious with edge-to-edge sharpness, higher
contrast, and whatever other "improvements" are now available on the 50
Summicron?

I'm afraid that only when that question is answered, can we then go on to
define what is an "aberration," and what is not.  We can certainly say what
is more or less *scientifically* "perfect," for whatever cold comfort that
is worth, but I don't think we can say which lens is capable of rendering
more beauty than another, at least not by any of the scientific criteria
I've seen discussed in the recent posts.

Still, thank you very much for elevating the discourse of this group to a
higher level, which is what you always seem to do.

Regards,

Bruce Feldman
Warsaw, Poland