Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/22

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

Subject: [Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica
From: lmc at interlink.es (Luis Miguel Castañeda)
Date: Wed Dec 22 04:51:12 2004
References: <3459B544-53EB-11D9-8C95-0003934599E0@iprimus.com.au> <p0600107abdeef68f1fc0@gpsy.com>

On 22 de dic de 2004, at 11:05, Karen Nakamura wrote:

> The January 2005  _Asahi Camera__ compares the new 25/28/35/50mm 
> Zeiss-Ikon lenses against their Leica equivalents (ASPH when 
> possible).  In the shootout, which I was reading while browsing 
> through a bookstore, the ZI lenses come out as equivalent in flare 
> tolerance (both the ZIs and ASPHs were basically flare free); the ZIs 
> were basically the same in sharpness and color temperature; and I 
> think the 50 Planar was just a tad less contrasty which the reviewer 
> thought gave better shadow depth.

Im asking to myself what's the point to compare so close things such 
these.

I didnt expect Zeiss launching lenses technically far beyond or far 
behind Leica or Voigtl?nder, neither much cheaper lenses to compete in 
the Voigtl?nder price field. Maybe the new ZI might be better designed 
with digital sensors in mind, but today I dont see the point in using 
ultra modern lenses in a [THE in fact] digital rangefinder (that kind 
of camera's point is to keep using the old-loved-fetished-already-owned 
ones imho).

In the other hand tests used to be long, clinical, and not too useful 
considerations about MTF curves, lines/inch and other nice stuff for 
heavily skilled optic afficionados... In the real world I haven't seen 
a true bad lens for years considering what the price tag says. BTW I'm 
interested in the down-to-field tests, comparing the same picture taken 
with lens A and lens B, commented by the editor but letting me see 
clearly what I do prefer for myself taking care that at the end nobody 
can make a widely agreed definition for bokeh, or if the actual papers 
will not resolve all the lines that your lens can get, or if someone 
prefers the pictoric effect of lens A over lens B or viceversa.

IMHO If a fotog can't name what is looking for in their own images, 
there is not much sense about discussing/buying what's scientifically 
the best design [so go for the cheapest], and if he can name it also 
there is no sense [targeted buy]:)

Sorry for the acid and boring speech, got the caustic day [and yes, I 
*always* read every review].

Saludos,
-------------------------------------------
http://www.imaginarymagnitude.net/blog/


Replies: Reply from mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)
In reply to: Message from mail at gpsy.com (Karen Nakamura) ([Leica] New Zeiss lenses compared against Leica)