[Leica] Konicagate

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@ision.nl>]

The topic of the difference in film register between Leica and Konica 
gives some insight into the working of the Lug and the level of image 
quality Leica users are willing to accept or demand.
When presented with my facts (K=28.00), the response is as to be 
expected: to kill the messenger(Puts has no qualifications (Stephen 
Gandy), to question his sources (Dante Stella: I do not trust the person 
from Germany), to diminish to impact (Cummer family: I do not see any 
difference, therefore none exists).
Then Dante Stella calls a repair person in New Jersey with identical 
info and now it is credible  ! Were is Stephen Gandy to question the 
status of Dante Stella: does he have 20 years of engineering experience 
which is Stephen Gandy's limit.
Then the Cummer family does a quick survey and finds that from 15 
individuals 15 are happy! Therefore there is no issue! Of course if I 
had done such a survey Stephen Gandy would have asked for my 20 years of 
experience in social surveys and statistical methodology.
Any one knows that a survey based on a non-random sample is worthless, 
especially as the main criterion: image quality is not all defined in a 
way that is repeatable with a control group. But the results will 
without any doubt please the group that will deny that there is an issue.

What we have here is the very classical case of negating the evidence, 
which started with the burning of the scientists who claimed that the 
earth is not flat (contrary to common sense), the earth moves around the 
sun (again), that atoms are the basics of the fabric of our universe, 
that ours is a relativistic universe etc.

At stake is the reputation of all those  journalists and dealers who 
claimed that the statement of Konica that their mount was not identical 
to the Leica M-mount, was just a figment of the imagination to 
circumvent possible legal actions by leica (which were unlikely as the 
patent had been expired as amply documented).
Here we have a unique case:  the manufacturer (who in most cases knows 
best) says that his product is not fully compatible with that of a 
competitor. This is denied by many individuals who without any facts 
other than a quick scan of the fitting of the lens and some pictures 
declare that the manufacturer is wrong.
As soon as it is established that indeed the manufacturer has been right 
all the time the full barrage of user experiences, fact negating, 
semantic word twisting is brought in place.

Bottom line the issue is more fundamental: there is without any doubt a 
difference between the film register of a Leica body/lens unit and a 
Konica body/lens unit and mixing these systems brings incompatibilities 
and a drop in image quality.
If some argue that they do not see this difference, does that proof 
there is no difference?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, someone of lost fame wrote in the 
past. I would paraphrase: "image quality is in the eye of the 
photographer".

The classical discussion about which lens is best (Summicron DR or 
current one) can be illuminated by the insight of the Konica/Leica 
compatibility issue: if you do not see a difference, it does not imply 
that there is no difference, but that the standards of image 
quality/optical performance need to be upgraded or redefined.
Quoting from Zeiss for once: if a lens has a potential of 100%, most 
users would have trouble extracting 50% of that. To extract 80% or more 
needs considerable expertise and years of experience.
If the Konica/leica incompatibility will reduce image quality 
significantly but not enough to get below the 50% threshold with which 
most users seem to operate, all is fine?
In a wellknown German book (by Mr Scholz) the author fitted a Leica body 
with  a simple glass element  from his spectacles (he could have used 
the bottom of an empty bottle of whiskey with equal results)  to prove 
that a simple meniscus (box lens) would suffice for highly acceptable 
image results. The resulting picture is very convincing. As long as we 
seem unable to differentiate between a 9 element super quality optical 
system and a simple spectacle glass in front of the M-body (or Konica 
body) why question the impact of a mere 0.2 mm of defocus.
Would it not be time for a re-calibration of our standards of image 
quality?

Erwin