[Leica] Uh...was that a yes or a no?

[Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net>]

>>>
...comparing lenses is a highly evolved matter that
has to be studied extensively before making any firm statements.
They will point out that there are so many error-sources involved in
any setup of a test, that there are so many aspects to be considered
and so many parameters of comparison...[etc.]
<<<

Erwin,
But who is comparing? I'm not comparing. I'm merely asking if you think
you can tell.

Who is trying to determine "better" or "best"? I'm not trying to
determine better or best. I'm merely asking if you think you can tell.

Who is "testing"? I'm not testing anything.

I'm not trying to determine anything scientific here. You said (I'm
sorry, I can't find the quote) that it is possible to see the unique
fingerprint of a Leica lens even on handheld shots made at dusk on
100-speed film.

I don't think I could. And I'm pretty darn good at that sort of thing.

I'm not talking about optical science in this instance. I'm talking
about PHOTOGRAPHY. I'm talking about whether you can actually see any of
these differences in actual photographs consistently enough to justify
your habit of asserting the innate and consistent superiority of one
brand of lenses over all other brands.

This isn't to "prove" anything. It's just to see whether a few people
can tell or not. Who knows? Maybe they can. We'll see.

So--do you want to take a shot at it, or don't you? The answer to that
one should be pretty simple--one word would do. Either you pick up the
gauntlet, or you leave it lie there. You in or out?

- --Mike