Leica's biggest disaster ever (apart from the magenta-hued M8 images)

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, Mar 18, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Mar 18, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    How do you figure it as a macro lens?
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 19, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    No, you're right, my mistake, it's not a macro lens. The macro lens
    is the 45mm f2.8. Which makes two bad Leica lenses that have come
    from the Leica-Panasonic collaboration. What is the problem? Can't
    be cost restrictions because both lenses are expensive and (for
    example) Nikon's 60mm macro which is about 1/2 the price and made for
    APS is FAR superior. Meanwhile, all the Zeiss lenses that have been
    made for Sony have been very good. Looks like the Leica-Panasonic
    team for micro 4/3rds needs some work. Leica's previous lenses for
    the 4/3rds system were both very good, the 14-50mm f2.8-3.5 is one of
    the best zooms in its class.
     
    RichA, Mar 19, 2011
    #3
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    At the risk of repeating myself (again), there is no "Leica-Panasonic
    collaboration". There is no Leica input into the design of the lenses
    made by Panasonic in Japan that bear the Leica branding.

    The branding is just a marketing tool that helps Panasonic charge more
    for some lenses that are optically slightly better than others that
    Panasonic makes. In return for the Leica branding, Leica Camera AG
    gets a fat fee from Panasonic for the use of the Leica brand name.

    The comparison posted to DPReview is very unscientific and cannot be
    taken as authoritative in any way.

    It is exactly the sort of test Rich loves. ;-)
     
    Bruce, Mar 19, 2011
    #4
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    You can't possible think that the Leica will ever, in any way match
    that Olympus zoom? You sound just like the Leica drum-beaters on that
    forum. The problem with Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc., users is that they
    are so used to rotten edge definition (someone told me Nikon's old
    18-70mm zoom was a good one, and Olympus' s cheap 14-42mm wasted it,
    on a 4/3rds camera body!!) that they can't believe a lens costing less
    than $1500 can deliver good edge to edge definition.
     
    RichA, Mar 20, 2011
    #5
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Quit ranting for a moment, if you can, and look at the so-called
    "comparison" again. The "Leica" lens is not focused at the correct
    distance. The Zuiko lens is perfectly focused.

    So the "comparison" is incompetent or rigged. I'm not a conspiracy
    theorist so let's assume the former.

    When you find another comparison where the lenses are both focused at
    the correct distance, do let us know.
     
    Bruce, Mar 20, 2011
    #6
  7. RichA

    Rich Guest

    Do let us know? Prissy is thy name.
     
    Rich, Mar 21, 2011
    #7
  8. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    The ad hominem attack only proves that you lost the argument.

    But there was never an argument, was there? You linked to a posting
    on DPReview by an ignorant and opinionated poster who claimed to have
    compared two lenses. But all he offered was two shots, one that was
    perfectly focused and the other that wasn't.

    So all he proved was that the Panasonic lens delivers a blurred image
    when not correctly focused. Big deal.

    But both you and he decided that this fatally flawed, invalid
    "comparison" could be used to draw definitive conclusions.

    At least you found a friend. ;-)
     
    Bruce, Mar 21, 2011
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.