Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/05/15

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Loupes and quality
From: Chandos Michael Brown <cmbrow@mail.wm.edu>
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 18:39:06 -0400

That's really interesting.  I did as much comparing as I could given the 
backwater (photographically speaking) I live in and opted for the Canon 4x 
on price/performance points.  I've used it for a year or so now and like it 
a lot, but wondered how it compared to the whole run of available 
loupes.  In any event, I'm plenty satisfied.

What I found most astonishing (which ought to make the pros laugh) is how 
incredible a difference a large, quality light table makes in working with 
negs and transparencies.  To be able to lay out 36 mounted transparencies 
in the order they were shot and to be able to see them well, has done more 
to improve the quality of my work than any number of more expensive 
accessories.

Alas, it took me *years* to figure this out.

CHandos



>There was a comprehensive test of commonly available film loupes in the
>French photo magazine Chasseur d'Images nr. 211 (March 99). Tested were:
>Ahel 4x4, Canon 4x4, KMZ Horizon x4, Leica 5x, Peak 4x, Pentax 5,5x,
>Schneider 4x, Schneider 6x aspheric, Pentax 5-11x, KMZ Horizon 10x,
>Schneider 10x, KMZ Horizon 4x (6x6) and Schneider 3x (6x6).
>Conclusions: best price/performance models are Canon 4x, Pentax 5,5x and
>Schneider 4x. But the highest awards go to Leica 5x and Schneider 6x
>aspheric.
>
>Pascal
>NO ARCHIVE
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>See my photo pages at http://members.xoom.com/cyberplace/
>--------------------------------------------------------
><<< PGP public key available on request >>>
>



Chandos Michael Brown
Assoc. Prof., History and American Studies
College of William and Mary

http:www.wm.edu/CAS/ASP/faculty/brown