wilfredo Posted October 22, 2006 Share #1 Â Posted October 22, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why is it that Leica shooters seem to be obsessed with sharpness when most of the stuff published in Leica Fotografie International is hardly ever sharp or even close to outstanding in terms of image quality, and the great historical pictures taken by Leica photographers don't fall under the criteria of outstanding image quality and sharpness either? Â This seems to be a paradox I don't quite comprehend, yet many will pay thousands for a Leica optic (I'm also guilty). Â Cheers, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Hi wilfredo, Take a look here Paradox. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jmr Posted October 22, 2006 Share #2 Â Posted October 22, 2006 Wilfredo, Â good question. I guess it could be that we sometimes confuse technical excellence in cameras and lenses with aesthetic excellence in images and photographs. Of course, most of us Leica photographers appreciate both Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambroving Posted October 22, 2006 Share #3 Â Posted October 22, 2006 Wilfredo, Â It's not about sharpness if you mean resolution. Never was. Leica has always known that contrast and what you can see counts. This is about compromises in color correction and resistance to veiling glare and flare. It's the richness and what your eye can perceive that counts. The rendition makes the optics worth the $$$ and they create the WOW factor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share #4 Â Posted October 23, 2006 JR: Â I guess I appreciate both myself. Â William, Â I understand the wow factor you write about but I often find these missing in Leica publications (not always but often) so I wonder about this? Â In my experience not all Leica lenses are the same, I started out with a 28mm ASPH Summicron in the wide angle department but found that skin tones looked too pastey and pale with that lens. I sold it and replaced it with the 35mm ASPH Summicron and I'm really happy with the skin tones I get from this lens. In the end, for me, artistic value remains above technical merit but it's nice to think one's equipment will deliver the best possible image. Â Cheers, Wilfredo+ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
waileong Posted October 23, 2006 Share #5 Â Posted October 23, 2006 Why is it that Leica shooters seem to be obsessed with sharpness when most of the stuff published in Leica Fotografie International is hardly ever sharp or even close to outstanding in terms of image quality, and the great historical pictures taken by Leica photographers don't fall under the criteria of outstanding image quality and sharpness either? Â This seems to be a paradox I don't quite comprehend, yet many will pay thousands for a Leica optic (I'm also guilty). Â One never complains about having too sharp a lens, too much money or too long a ... Â A sharp lens can be used to take soft photos-- simply put a soft filter or do a gaussian blur after a scan. Â A soft lens cannot be used to take a sharp photo. You can't reintroduce sharpness to a photo. Â Basically then, the answer is-- because people want the best, even if they don't really use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.