Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/05/10

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

Subject: [Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?
From: don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory)
Date: Wed May 10 20:01:25 2006
References: <C0881478.10668%bdcolen@comcast.net> <000401c674a4$f04bb5f0$f944e344@newukolbqveo9i>

Jeffery,
I don't tend to mark what my lens useage is unless it is somewhat extreme.
But about 50% of my images lately(excluding flowers) are made with the 50
ASPH.  But, as B.D. points out, that only matters if the 50 reflects your
personal artistic vision.  Many prefer a 35 and some prefer a 28.

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 5/10/06, Jeffery Smith <jsmith342@cox.net> wrote:
>
> I'm finding that more people have this lens than I had expected. It sure
> doesn't get much "air time" on the LUG for being held in such high regard.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> http://www.400tx.com
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of B. D.
> Colen
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:07 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?
>
>
> Summilux 50 asph - no contest. And I say this not ever having used one.
> :-)
> But if you say only one lens, I want the combination of size, speed, and
> performance. I've never owned a Noctilux, and haven't missed a thing. I
> have
> owned Summicrons, and while they're wonderful lenses, I want more speed.
> So
> what does that leave - a Summilux. And based on what I've seen, and
> everyone
> has said about the performance - I'll go for it sight unseen. But I'd
> rather
> have the 35 Summilux Asph if I could only have one lens. ;-)
>
>
> > Subject: [Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?
> >
> > Now, this  isn't a "What should I buy?" question because I have nearly
> > all of them already. And the Noctilux 50/1.0 isn't the right answer
> > because it is really designed to be used under limited light and it is
> > just too darned big, expensive, and heavy to be a "best" of all
> > worlds. Take into account:
> >
> > Sharpness (a subjective perception)
> > Contrast
> > Bokeh
> > Easy of use (yeah, I guess that means weight and size) Contrast
> > Versatility
> > Affordability (keep in mind that I'm talking to LUGers who could afford
> the
> > body...they have enough to buy this lens, but who spend $3,800 if you
> can
> > buy the best all-around 50 for less?)
> > Use with today's films, not classic films
> > Intangibles
> >
> > I have a pretty good idea of what most folks would say, but wondered
> > if I am right. If the Department of Homeland Security dictated that a
> > photographer could have only one lens, a 50 (so you couldn't take
> > pictures of places you planned to attack), what would it be? Oh, and
> > it has to be Leica.
> >
> > Jeffery Smith
> > New Orleans, LA
> > http://www.400tx.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?)
Message from jsmith342 at cox.net (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] What's the Best All-Around 50?)