Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tom, I shoot ISO 400 B&W negatives alone and make mostly up to 20x30 cm prints. This is not a very good platform where one can say something about lens characters. Nontheless, I was surprised to see differences when I switched from Canon to Contax SLR/G. I was much more surprised to see differences when I switched from Contax SLR/G to Leica R/M. Frankly speaking, I regretted switching from Zeiss to Leica for a whole year, because I then was not happy with the differences I saw. I cannot tell which marque is used with every picture, but with a roll of film I regularly use I may be able to do so. I would be curious what you think about my evaluation of Leica and Zeiss lenses at my site. Do they make no sense?? http://arbos.silva.net/equipment.htm Mikiro At 2:42 pm +0100 18/1/00, TEAShea@aol.com wrote: >I have over 60 current generation lenses for Contax SLR, Contax G2, Canon EOS >and Leica M systems. I am unable to distinguish among photos taken with >equivalent lenses for prints up to 8 x 10. Moreover, I find no differences >in the "look" among lens families. It would interesting to have a controlled >study done on this issue of the differences in results. > >That said, I remain fascinated by lens testing and am a big supporter of such >testing. I particularly an interested and appreciative of Erwin's tests. I >believe him. He has my confidence. Even if I can see no differences in my >prints, I like to know the (unused) qualitative differences. > >Tom Shea