RE: [Leica] 1Ds digital results

["bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

It very much depends on the lens, Peter - There is no question, for
instance, that the performance of the 21 2.8 ASPH M lens is superior
- -certainly in terms of distortion, to any Nikon prime, or zoom, at 21.
On the other hand, I believe the performance of the 85 1.4 to be every
bit as good as that of the Leica M 75 1.4 - in fact, to my eyes the
performance is identical.

There is no question that the latest versions of the M lenses are pretty
amazing - I am blown away by the Summicron 28, and have long been a fan
of the 35 Summilux ASPH. And, no the Nikon 28 1.4 at 1.4 doesn't match
the Summicron 28 at f2 - but again I'm  talking general impressions, as
I no longer own the Nikon. I will say, however, that that Nikon is a
very impressive lens, and there are times when I wish I still had the
extra stop - although, given that I can handhold the M successfully at
lower shutter speeds than I can shoot with the f100, the loss of the
stop may be a wash.

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Peter
Klein
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 2:36 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] 1Ds digital results


B.D., I think there is one very good reason to use Leica glass you
haven't
mentioned:  The ability to use a lens wide open with much less loss of
performance than you get with almost all other glass.

Are you saying that in available light conditions, at f/1.4 - 2.8,
pro-level Canon and Nikkor lenses do as well as the newest Leica glass?
I'm curious, not arguing.

I see the difference between classic Summicrons and current Leica
lenses.  
Close down a little, and it hardly matters for most practical purposes.

Wide open, it's there. Have current pro-grade SLR lenses improved that
much as well?

Of course, with available light, we also get into the SLR vs. RF stuff,
like focusing accuracy, lack of mirror slap, etc.

- --Peter Klein
Seattle, WA


B.D. says:
> True enough, Austin. But I believe that, for real world purposes - 
> which include most general uses of photographs - there comes a point 
> of no return in terms of improved image quality that can be seen by 
> the naked eye at normal viewing distances, whether on the printed 
> page, a slide screen, or a gallery wall - and modern Leica lenses take

> the image well past that point. In fact, most pro Nikon and Canon 
> lenses take the image past that point as well, although there are 
> certainly some qualities possessed by some Leica lenses, particularly 
> comparative lack of distortion and flare in the wides, that can be 
> seen by the naked eye when compared to most lenses of other 
> manufacturers.


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

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