Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark, At the risk of contradicting myself, I repeat: Leica lenses are the best. No question about it. I will never sell my 100mm Apo Macro. But I also assumed that the person to whom I was giving advice was someone of average means, like most of us, and that he had no prior attachment to the Leica R system. Given that, money has to play a part in the advice. Normally when evaluating any piece of equipment, people look not just at the quality, nor only at the price, but at the overall price/quality ratio. I have a 1.8/85mm Canon lens which I bought used for $285. A used 100mm Apo Macro will cost at least $1800 (that is the lowest price I have seen advertised). Can I honestly say that for someone of average means, buying the Leica is justified when for 1/6 of the price he can get a Canon lens of comparable focal length, more than 1 stop wider aperture and autofocus, which will give him 95%+ of what the Leica lens gives? I think not. Yes, we all love our Leica stuff, but at some point rationality has to enter into the equation. Nathan Mark Rabiner wrote: > Nathan I seem to recall you have and here on the internet you sure hear > about a lot of guys who just go gung ho over digital and cant see > themselves > ever going back to film for anything. Just leaves me scratching my head. > I have. I've shot more film the past two months than made digital captures. > Last year I went nuts focusing on digital getting it down. > Love it. It's great. I know how to do it. Now I'm back to shooting a bunch > more film. I guess I've already gone full circle. > Not that I've printed it in the darkroom I'm using the Epson 2200 but > darkroom time will come back soon enough to a proper balance. Like I'll go > in there before my hair turns white. > > I'm basically a Leica guy. > I've long gotten over if Leica can justify it's prices or not. It's a small > company. I don't think the Herr Cones flew around in Lear Jets. > A Leica lens I save for a year to get. That's just been part of my Leica > ballgame for a dozen years now. I feel the results are worth it or I'd not > do that. > That's why I'm here on the Leica users group a list of people who I assume > think Leica is worth it for them. We buy the stuff and use it. > Thought you were in that category too! > > IF it didn't I wouldn't I'd just buy Nikon stuff for 35 and digital 35 on a > whim or when the mood moves me. > > To me a reason to get into Leica R, me being mainly a rangefinder shooter > is > for the 60 and 100 macro. And down the line a real long lens. Maybe if I > win > the lottery the modular system. The rest I can do with my M system and > hopefully have a digital body for it soon so I'll really be using it. > I love my Nikon system but would love more to use it less. > > To me a 100 macro is a very very useful thing. > As is a 60. > I'd love to be shooting Leica on that instead of Nikon that I am now. > Although I cant say shooting Nikon is a painful experience. > > I did notice when I got my 60 AF macro Nikor last year that for not that > much more I could have gotten a used 60 macro Leica lens. Same one Salgato > uses for so much stuff and I've seen those prints. And they look better > than > mine. And its not his enlarger lens or something he's putting in his > Dektol. > Subject matter not included. > > > Mark Rabiner > Photography > Portland Oregon > http://rabinergroup.com/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > -- Nathan Wajsman Almere, The Netherlands General photography: http://www.nathanfoto.com Seville photography: http://www.fotosevilla.com Stock photography: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=507 Prints for sale: http://www.photodeluge.com