Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Robert Appleby <robert.appleby@tin.it> wrote (edited): > I've never been able to get the idea that somehow older, > less "sharp" lenses with the "glow" (which is presumably > just veiling flare) are better or more interesting than > modern ones. In practical terms, that is. IMO it's strictly a matter of personal taste. Is maximum sharpness always desirable? Is flare always evil? By whose standards? There are no absolute standards for photographic excellence. This is part of what makes it all so much fun. My old LTM 50 Summar may not be a particularly practical lens for general shooting but its softness works well for portraiture or whenever else I want soft images. The photographer should drive the technology, not vice versa. The lens that does the job you want it to do is always the right one...new, old, ASPH, uncoated, whatever. - -Dave-