Can I catch Confirmation Virus from a Old Leica Lens?

[gmgraves]

On 1/29/2020 at 5:15 PM, Ralf11 said:

I was doing some reading about the old pre-Asph leica lenses recently, and it struck me that there are a number of parallels to audiophile products:

 

- there was a lot of argument about whether these lenses really did render differently

 

- then more arguments on what the mechanism was if they did...

 

- and finally, numerous claims that they did and while not as accurate, it was more pleasing to the eye

 

Depends on whether your talking an Elmar 50mm f:3.5 or a Summilux 50mm f:1.4.😏

[gmgraves]

43 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

There appears to be general agreement (though this could be wrong) that the lenses are designed and produced by Panasonic but the designs are submitted for approval to Leica with respect to their optical characteristics and manufacturing tolerances. Hence, Panasonic-Leica lenses are required to meet a set of demanding quality standards established by Leica but are otherwise the result of Japanese optical manufacturing excellence.  Does this make sense?

I dunno about Panasonic, but a number of years ago, Leica was partnered with Minolta. Leica made most of their prime lenses, but Minolta made their zoom lenses and the parts for the Leica SLR. What Minolta shipped to Leica was only the glass. Leica made the lens mechanicals and assembled the lenses and aligned them to Leica specifications. Not to mention that Leica used a different, and proprietary lens mount from that which Minolta used. Minolta also supplied the “innards” of the Leica SLR camera, but Leica re-machined the mechanical parts to closer tolerances, and put them in a camera body that they designed and built in-house. 
The funny thing is that even though Minolta supplied the glass for the 70-210mm zoom lens (for instance),  the Leica version always outperformed the Minolta version of the same lens simply because Leica’s mechanicals and alignment of the individual elements was that much more precise. Of course one paid for that precision (probably still do) as the Leica version was thousands of dollars while the Minolta version was mere hundreds.

[gmgraves]

On 2/1/2020 at 9:45 AM, accwai said:

Would it be possible to post some examples for the benefit of us not so advanced?

 

 

So does this have Leica glow or not?

 

 

Would 17+" of carbon ceramic and 10 pistons in a caliper be worthy of consideration then?

 

Ah, Lamborghinis. The Hoodlum’s Ferrari

[gmgraves]

10 hours ago, marce said:

I use Sigma and Nikon, the new Sigmas (art series) are nice.😁

I used to use Nikon F series for essentially my entire adult life. I started with an F and culminated with F4 and a bag full of Nikkor lenses for years until digital took over. Then I changed over to Nikon digital bodies. About two years ago a friend of mine showed me his new Canon SX60 with a non-detachable lens that went from 21 mm to 1330 mm equivalent (optical) continuous zoom. Wow! No more bag full of lenses to haul around. I have never looked back and am generally very pleased with the result.

[gmgraves]

6 hours ago, marce said:

I am looking at going the same way, a major operation has left me not as strong as I use to be and lugging a full frame and lenses round has lost its appeal.

When you get to the point that you always decide to not take your camera gear along with you when you go out because you don’t want to lug it around, then that’s when these SLR-like non-interchangeable lens digital cameras start looking really attractive. I can shoot stills, H-D video and have every focal length from ultra wide angle to super telephoto at the touch of a button!