Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]<SNIP> >>>>...And I was happy with my old Summaron 35mm except at f3.5 it seemed a mite slow, but, with excellent results from 16x20 blowups, but still ... so I went out and spent alot of money on a new Summilux 35 f1.4. And except for the larger aperture hard to see much difference. So what's the point? Well I have been a photographer for 30 years all with Nikons and have had over 1,000 photos published; I have shot Goldie Hawn, Gregory Peck, Burt Reynolds,>>> BURT REYNOLDS!! >>>> Tiny Tim, Steven Spielberg and even President George Bush in the oval office. I could go on. All of these years, believe it or not, I just went out and took pictures. And guess what? I NEVER read ANY photo magazines.>>>> Me too. I mean neither have I. Then I learn something and my pictures get worse. The rule of thirds...Is that what one should have in mind while shooting? That's too bad - you mean it gets more complex? All my stuff was rule of thirds then I learned about it and my composition just isn't the same. It all goes that way. >>>> Then I discovered Leica, and, the Leica MYSTIQUE. Such enthusiam. I had to find out everything about them I started to buy books, I searched the web, I joined the LUG and LEG. I took many pictures with the Leicas and compared them with thousands of Nikor pictures.....hmmm....must be these old Leica lenses 'cause I cant see much difference. Then, it became, must be I need some new Leica lenses. Now it has become.... maybe I will go back to blissfully taking pictures without reading all this stuff because I cannot possibly keep up with it all.<<>>>> It's the users not the leica stuff. So the coma is better or worse (!?). Or the corners. I read em and I use them for decisions, etc. Why? Well what should I do! If I find the images are excellent - that the quality (that I see or whatever...) is superior and I like the lens in all respects (the price is the best) and Mr. X says it's done wonders on the bench that just makes me happier (or more commonly the opposite). As some have recently pointed out in various ways, the tests and user reports are NOT the same. But I don't think anyone thinks they are incompatible, or that those who are 'testing' don't usually NOT consider this if you show them one of you're nice photos. Later, but everyone's compatible in the real world of opinions in terms of justification of artistic form. How many have evidence that the reports on the new 24 are 'useless'. Easier to prove the opposite. And if only a dummy would rely on tests, be a dummy! One who doubts everything will just doubt the truth as well. Instead of invalidating the method altogether, prove that the 35 asph, 24 asph are not really that good afterall. You must play by the same rules and same terms or you are challenging methods not the argument on it's own terms. And if you can't well mix and match and you'll have nice lenses. This is of course NOT advice as I am not in any sort of a position to 'advise' anyone. Maybe that's not good I don't know.