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

["Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>]

Which lenses are you using exactly?

My guess is that if the pictures have sufficient detail, say tack sharp tree
branches etc. that lenses with significantly different MTFs will have
demonstrably different photos ASSUMING you use Delta/Tmax 100 or sharper
film. If you use Tri-X I think it will be hard to tell the lenses apart
unless there are *very* gross differences in the high frequency parts of the
MTF. The lenses should have equal max aperatures and be used wide open (e.g.
compare all 35/1.4-5 lenses or all 50/1.4-5).

Fancy way of saying that you can certainly tell the difference between some
lenses, especially older lenses, but many new lenses from top manufactorers
will be very similar.

Jonathan Borden

Mike Johnston wrote:
> Subject: [Leica] Uh...was that a yes or a no?
>
>
> >>>
> ...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
>