Re: [Leica] Re: A sobering thought

[SthRosner@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/11/02 5:56:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ericm@pobox.com 
writes:

> >http://frozenmoments.virtualave.net/LensTests/LensTestIndex007.htm#f1.2
>  
>  >for Pop Photo's comparisons of 32 normal lenses in 1976.
>  
>  >It also solves the question of why no one talks about the
>  >Leica 50/1.2 Noctilux anymore.
>  
>  Pop Photo also thinks the Heliar 50mm is one of the 3 top prime lenses:

Pop Photo is just that, photography for the popular masses. What a joke. The 
cover for the issue that calls the Heliar one of the three said they were 
choosing the 3 top prime lenses of all time. No Leitz/Leica, no Zeiss and, I 
think, no Nikon, Canon, etc.. All three were mass-produced, mass consumer 
market items manufactured by companies that are major advertisers. How's that 
for editorial independence?

I found it sufficiently vexing that I emailed the Editor - so-called - my 
remonstrance and got a mealy-mouthed response.

My recollection is that Modern Photography did not do its editorial business 
that way. Perhaps that's why, in today's commercial world, Modern is dead. 

Without intending to start another conflagration, it may also mark the 
difference - though certainly not in so blatant a way - between Leica 
Fotografie International (I've been a subscriber for at least a 
quarter-century) and VIEWFINDER, the LHSA quarterly. To some readers with 
whom I've spoken, the former occasionally comes close to the line of being a 
Solms house organ. 

VIEWFINDER is of course Leica-oriented but publishes opinions on all sides of 
any Leica-related topic. To be fair, Roy Moss, VIEWFINDER's immediate past 
editor, has a clear preference for Leica gear from the 1970s and earlier and 
that was probably reflected in content. But Roy always published - and was 
prepared to publish - all sides of any controversial issue.

Seth               LaK 9
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html