Rick Posted November 12, 2010 Share #61 Posted November 12, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why do people rise to defend poor quality? I've no idea. I guess because statements like your's are total non-scientific bullsh*t, that's why. I have the M9 and seven lenses and I test every lens I get because of statements like your's and others about poor quality and I have never found a problem. That is why people defend Leica quality. Leica quality is real, believe it. I understand that there are problems, of course, but people that read these posts about problems have to realize that these problems reported here are a small percentage compared to the total number of products made. This forum represents just a SMALL percentage of Leica products sold and the problems reported here are an even smaller percentage of this subset. Further, the people that seek out forums are here because they are having problems. That is the major reason people get on line. The number of people that get on line to waste their time and just chat, is small compared to those that are here with problems. Don't you get that. Read through the agendas. You can't be that stupid. Can you? Next, the people that go on line and waste time are often anal retentive. They want to set up pixel peeping, yardstick measuring, back/front focusing, brickwall picture taking tests. They don't go out and enjoy the "quality" of Leica. They enjoy the quantitative sport of finding errors and obsessing. They can't just enjoy the wonder and awe of it all. So, back to your original question. The reason people defend poor quality is because they get the concept that Leica does represent quality and they aren't having quality problems. They get that Leica is quality. Ask Lars. He can tell you that Leica does have quality or he wouldn't own it. Frustrated, yes. But, I bet he wouldn't trade it for anything. What digital M do you own, by the way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2010 Posted November 12, 2010 Hi Rick, Take a look here Focusing Metaphysics. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lars_bergquist Posted November 12, 2010 Author Share #62 Posted November 12, 2010 Lar's lens is actually 5mm off. Go look at a mm-ruler and see what 5mm really is. It really doesn't make that much of a difference in a real picture of a person, for example. Dear Rick, My Elmarit is not 5 millimeters off. It is 6--8 centimeters off. Meaning about three inches, for you non-metric inchworms. And I am not an anal-rententive lens tester. I simply couldn't get sharp pictures from my supposedly perfectly adjusted lens. When I found that -- not before -- I did try to find out why. Well, I did find out. Apart from that, I share several of your sentiments. And this is the first of my Leica lenses ever that has had focusing problems, apart from the well-known focus shift of the first version 35mm Summilux ASPH. I exchanged that for my present, current version lens. And I refuse to see in this any connection to possible subconscious attitudes to bowel movements. I do also appreciate your occasionally vivid language. Those who have followed my postings here will understand why. The grumpy old man from the subarctic woods Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 12, 2010 Share #63 Posted November 12, 2010 Okay, I call. I cannot believe that Leica is using pre-digital metrics as a standard for their new lenses. It makes no sense whatsoever. Further, Leica's QC metrics, their standard, is entirely defective for the focusing of their new lenses. Why do people rise to defend poor quality? I've no idea. They don' t. They did years ago in the the film days. Unfortunately people are still using those low-grade out-dated lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted November 12, 2010 Share #64 Posted November 12, 2010 They don' t. They did years ago in the the film days. Unfortunately people are still using those low-grade out-dated lenses. I'm trying to decide whether this is irony or a serious statement . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 12, 2010 Share #65 Posted November 12, 2010 I guess because statements like your's are total non-scientific bullsh*t, that's why. I have the M9 and seven lenses and I test every lens I get because of statements like your's and others about poor quality and I have never found a problem. That is why people defend Leica quality. Leica quality is real, believe it. I understand that there are problems, of course, but people that read these posts about problems have to realize that these problems reported here are a small percentage compared to the total number of products made. This forum represents just a SMALL percentage of Leica products sold and the problems reported here are an even smaller percentage of this subset. Further, the people that seek out forums are here because they are having problems. That is the major reason people get on line. The number of people that get on line to waste their time and just chat, is small compared to those that are here with problems. Don't you get that. Read through the agendas. You can't be that stupid. Can you? Yes, I can be that stupid. Your point regarding the sample size is well taken. I will give it more consideration within a statistical POV. I do not have an M8 or M9, or any other Leica digital, although I do have the Lumix G1 by Panasonic, and it broke within two months. I just threw it in the bin. I am too old and have no time left to hassle with poor QC. Sorry if I upset you or anyone else. Sometimes I'm a bit grumpy. Forgive, please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 12, 2010 Share #66 Posted November 12, 2010 They don' t. They did years ago in the the film days. Unfortunately people are still using those low-grade out-dated lenses. That comment made me smile. I still use the 2nd version of the 35mm Summilux precisely because of the nature of the image, which has excellent OOF and is somewhat soft wide-open. At one time photographers sought out a look rather than going by resolution figures or MTF metrics. I'm still in the old school and will never leave it. -- Pico - Sharpness is way over rated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 12, 2010 Share #67 Posted November 12, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...Sometimes I'm a bit grumpy... Welcome to the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted November 12, 2010 Share #68 Posted November 12, 2010 Sharpness is way over rated. No sh!t... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ...of course this is a modern Sonnar (on an MP), wide open to give that "old school" look, but still... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ...of course this is a modern Sonnar (on an MP), wide open to give that "old school" look, but still... Regards, Bill ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/136306-focusing-metaphysics/?do=findComment&comment=1500441'>More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 12, 2010 Share #69 Posted November 12, 2010 pico, I took the stupid part out of my post when I re-read it but I guess I was too late on the "edit." I get rolling on these things and go over the line sometimes. I apologies for flat out asking if you are stupid. Us grumps need to stick together around here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 13, 2010 Share #70 Posted November 13, 2010 I'm trying to decide whether this is irony or a serious statement . . .I'll help with a smiley: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted November 13, 2010 Share #71 Posted November 13, 2010 I'll help with a smiley: Ahhh, that's good ! I have some of those out-dated lenses. In fact, just about all my lenses are obsolete examples of outdated design philosophies and manufacturing techniques. Rather like their owner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.