Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/08

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Poor Leica QC
From: "Ken Iisaka" <ken@iisaka.org>
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 15:25:03 -0700
References: <000001bfe91b$c65a2ad0$640210ac@siege.jcberger.com>

> You should have bought the ASPH, that's the reason ;-). I had this
lens too
> and, like you, I found it of poor quality. The zooming ring is hard to
find
> and does not seem coupled to the viewfinder, performances at f/1.4 are
> almost nil and autofocus never worked.  A real dog.

It's a worthless piece of s___.  Now pack it up and send it to me.

> --
> Jean-Claude Berger (jcberger@jcberger.com)
> Systems and RDBMS consultant (MCSE)
> Lyon, France
> http://www.jcberger.com
>
> >
> > Some time ago, I bought a 35mm f/2 Summicron pre-ASPH, and I'm
> > sorry to say,
> > I've been the victim of the poor QC that so many report on here.
> > This is a
> > Leica lens, supposedly the best in the world among camera
> > marques, and yet,
> > when I take pictures with it, I'm lucky to get one or maybe two good
shots
> > per roll of film.  The rest suck, they're just as bad as the ones
> > I used to
> > get with the Konica Hexar, and in some cases, I got better
> > pictures with my
> > Nikon F3 and 105mm lens.
> >
> > I find it really disappointing that, after having spent so much
money on
> > this lens, Leica couldn't do a better job of quality control.
> >
> > M.
> >
> > --
> > Martin Howard                | It never ceases to amaze me how
people con-
> > Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU  | sistently pay more attention to *how*
you
> > email: howard.390@osu.edu    | say something, than *what* you say.
(Anon)
> > www: http://mvhoward.i.am/
+--------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
>
>

In reply to: Message from "Jean-Claude Berger" <jcberger@jcberger.com> (RE: [Leica] Poor Leica QC)