Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/11

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

Subject: [Leica] Bob Schell on Leica-lens-centring
From: bladman99 at yahoo.ca (Dan C)
Date: Sat Jun 11 16:26:05 2005

As a long time Minolta and Leica user I agree wholeheartedly with this
clearly well-balanced appraisal.

-dan c.

At 01:41 PM 11-06-05 -0700, Martin Krieger wrote:
>This is from the cvug group:
>
>Since I test cameras and lenses for photo magazines I have probably 
>> used more different cameras and lenses than most.  Generally, in 
>> comparing SLR lenses,  I have found that Leica and Zeiss are at the 
>> top in most cases.  Particularly this is true of their newer designs.  
>> The difference is that Leica go to obsessive lengths in assembly of 
>> lenses to center elements precisely and adjust everything to very 
>> tight tolerances. Zeiss is much less obsessive about this stuff, and 
>> the Japanese manufacturers don't do any specific centering except 
>> possibly in very expensive lenses. When comparing Nikon and Canon,  I 
>> have found that Nikon makes marginally better wide angle lenses and 
>> Canon makes better long telephotos.  Minolta is as good as either of 
>> them, and beats both handily in many lenses.  Pentax is a close third, 
>> with a handful of really outstanding optics.  Olympus used to come in 
>> dead last, with some real coke bottles, but I hear their new 4/3 glass 
>> is really good.  I haven't used any of it myself.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from krieger at usc.edu (Martin Krieger) ([Leica] Bob Schell on Leica-lens-centring)