Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/29

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: WAS:The Canon Challenge [Macro-Micro Stuff]! no brainer!
From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:15:18 -0800
References: <12CBCEEE-4355-11D6-BF14-003065D4DE46@sohogurus.net>

Allan Wafkowski wrote:
>>> Ted, you have it wrong on all accounts. This is not a "mine is better
> than yours" thing. The kind of testing  Erwin does means next to nothing
> in real-life situations.<<<<<<

Hi Allan,,
Good, as I took it to read a mine is better etc etc. meaningless in real
life shooting.

>>but too many people fail to discern that a lab test is not a field test.
<<<

I agree and have never taken much countenance in bench testing, merely
numbers that generally satisfy and impress the techie folks, but meaningless
diddily when your a working shooter more concerned in the content of the
photograph than the squigglies per mm.

>>> I've heard people make utterly impossible remarks like, "My lens gives
> my slides a slightly blue cast."  When questioned, the guy said that he
> read about the color cast in a test.<<<

Well you see sometimes it's detrimental to your health and visual abilities
when you read too much. And certainly when you listen to too many "photo
experts!" :-)

>> I don't know about you, Ted, but with the variables in film and
processing, I know I've never seen a tint caused by a lens.<<<

It's quite possible lens to lens, different manufacturers. And yes
processing can throw tint in. However, a few years back I was shooting with
a dozen other photogs all shooting for the same audio visual company in
Vancouver, huge operation where the editing room had at least 20 light
tables 6 X 8 feet and most times many were covered with slides..........
always Kodachrome, usually K64.

I was the only Leica user, the others were Canon or Nikon and I think one
guy was doing Pentax. Anyway the chief designer could walk through the
tables and pick out Leica slides as easy as picking black & white jelly
beans. He could do that whether he knew which shows I'd been working on or
not.

Why? Because he claimed there were two things that sorted out Leica from all
the rest....... "different clarity" as he put it, probably meant contrast or
crispness, and the colour! And when you're looking at literally hundreds of
slides at the same time on light corrected tables you can see subtle
differences of colour. Even lens to lens and I'm not talking with colour
filters attached to the lens.

And very pronounced at times where a couple of shooters have been working
nearly side by each at the same time, same location, same light, same
subject.......... just different angles or lens length.

So as far as various lenses giving a colour cast there isn't any question,
although you may not have experienced it personally, it is a factor lens to
lens, manufacturer to manufacturer.

>>> I'm going to ship Doug as many slides as I can made decent out of a 36
> roll of Kodachrome using the macro subjects I find around me. I will try
> to use common subjects like leaves, bark, etc., under daylight
> conditions.  Doug has experience he can call upon to help him judge the
> slides. No one is asking him to tell us which lens is "better", merely
> to tell us if he can see a difference that is inherent to the lenses. I
> want to make it clear that this is NOT an argument, but an enquire.<<<

But for this to really have any meaning do you not require at least seeing
slides shot at the same time with various lenses to be able to see if there
is a difference?

I mean the Chief designer I mentioned did nothing day after day but look at
thousands of slides and literally hundreds all shot around the identical
location where it was apparent to recognize differences.

In what I think you're proposing, a few slides of various subjects under
what will be varying light conditions and changes, is a pretty tough call
for any one. Even Doug with all his time in, although someone of his
experience will see any variations faster than a person who exposes a few
rolls every couple months.

I guess I'm still at a loss at what this will actually prove and the effort
going into it does have the appearance of wasted time. However, it's your
call and your effort and that of Doug's. But what if he finds the lens has a
"cold blue" cast?

Do you sell it and buy a different lens? Or worse, buy a colour correction
filter to compensate what you all of a sudden feel your slides have a cold
look about them? And yet up to this point you were very happy with the
results.

So sometimes you see, too much knowledge can screw up a happy lens feeling
or lover! :-) Trust me, even if you don't see any on your slides..... it
truly does happen. :-)
ted

Ted Grant Photography Limited
www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Allan Wafkowski <allan@sohogurus.net> ([Leica] Re: WAS:The Canon Challenge [Macro-Micro Stuff]! no brainer!)