Opinions and what they are worth

[henri_straat]

Recently I sought some advice on the summicron lens. In that post I 'pulled'

some information from Steve Gandy's website about identifyting versions of the

summicron.

 

In that post I was trying to decide whether to purchase the latest version of

the Summicron or the former version - my purchase decision was based on

coatings or the lack of them. I hadn't seriously considered the current 50mm

2.8 Elmar, because Steve Gandy wrote it off as not being as well designed as

the former one. Some other members pointed out that this maybe a better option

because the current one has better coatings than the last one so it would be

more practical in strong backlight conditions.

 

So, I was wondering whether there are others members out there who also

sometimes find themselves blindly following the opinions of Leica experts

without questioning how the particular product would be suitable to them in an

everyday situation. One mans dud lens is another mans treasure so to speak.

 

It occurred to me that there are a few names that I frequently come across

when digging for information about Leica on this forum or the rangefinder

forum. Some of these names include Erwin Putts, Steve Gandy, Tom Abrahamsson,

Jonathan Eastland and Roger Hicks. How much value do you place on these

individuals opinions?

 

This post is in no way meant to devalue their collective expert opinion, I'm

just curious how much we should follow expert opinion when trying to make an

informed puchase decision. Because beyond the MTF charts alot of advice on

lens and camera models comes across as quite subjective, especially in the

world of Leica.

[rogerwb]

The gentlemen you have mentioned have experience with a number of Leitz and other made-for-Leica lenses and offer objective comparisons.(no pun intended) I would consider their opinions valuable but the bottom line is what works for you.

 

Beware of those who only recommend the latest $5000 multi coated asph whichever as it is what they own and only want you to know so.

[blakley]

Henri, I think the best guide is your own experience; if you can borrow or rent a piece of equipment you're considering it will be the most valuable guide to your judgment.

 

Having said this, a lot of members of this forum - even the feisty ones! - have extensive experience with Leica products and generally give excellent advice. Erwin Puts, Steven Gandy, Tom Abrahamsson, and Roger Hicks all give advice that I frequently find helpful and accurate. I don't read Jonathan Eastland much so I'm not really qualified to comment on that score.

 

And of course, the excellence of any photographic product is heavily conditioned by the artistic and technical abilities and subjective preferences of its user - Holgas frequently make pictures I love, despite an MTF graph which probably needs negative numbers....

[mike-images]

I use a number of unfashionable Leica/Leitz M lenses, foremost amongst which is the 90mm "thin" Tele Elmarit. I also have some well thought of Leica lenses. My team range from the early 70s to the late 90s.

 

The thin T-E is "well known" as being a "second rate performer". I love the lens, it's small, performs better than I can tell and is an all round favourite.

 

I've come to the view that whilst "experts" may be able to tell the difference between the performance of lenses, it's not enough to matter to me.

 

Whilst particular lenses in Leica line-up may be poorer performers than others, overall even the "worst" lens is probably better than I'll ever need.

 

Where it really does matter is in the price of the lens. If they have a poor rep then they are simply more affordable for luddites like me.

 

On the subject of the experts you name. I respect each of them. But ultimately I believe that each is only presenting a particular perspective. It is for me to make the decision.

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

[ronald_moravec1]

The currernt elmar or last version just discontinued is a very fine lens.

 

Technically it is better than the first 2.8. MECHANICALLY IT IS not as good but equal to what is currently made.

 

They should all have opinions with merit, however it can come down to taste. Technically perfect lenses may not make pictures that please you.

 

Short summary of the line, the original is a lowish contrast very sharp lens. DR/Rigid models ( original 50 2.8 is similar) have a significant increase in contrast as does each new generation. The center area of sharp definition at 2.0 and 2.8 gets bigger with each new generation. The last 50 2.8 is kind of a hybred of the version 3 and last version Summicron.

[zapata_espinoza]

>Erwin Putts, Steve Gandy, Tom Abrahamsson, Jonathan Eastland and Roger Hicks. How much value do you place on these individuals opinions?<

 

None! I only value opinions from people who have come up with relevant work.

[steven_moseley1]

...a good photographer with good technique will take FAR better photos with an average lens than an average photographer with the latest 2 zillion dollar ASPH whatever...

 

....AND many of the so-called internet experts (I am excluding those mentioned), especially on the web hardly if ever have much hands-on knowledge of what they rant on about..many are just repeating things they have read elsewhere and are taking it as 'gospel fact'....

[stuart_richardson]

What these people offer is their context and broader experience. The only thing that matters

is your own vision and preferences. Once you have figured out what you like, then it can be

useful to compare their opinions to your own. If you find someone who tends to line up with

your own interests, then their opinions can be quite useful. For example, Dante Stella is not

mentioned here, but I found in the course of my photography that we had similar opinions

about lenses and cameras. So while I respect the opinions of someone like Gandy or Puts, I

find that they don't often line up with my own. On the other hand, if I read about a lens that

Dante Stella regards highly, chances are very high that I will also like it.

[will_wright1]

most (all?) Leica lenses, new or old are better than you are! spend your resources on

shooting and learning...

[SCL]

I use opinions as part of the research process, looking for consistency of opinion based on extended personal usage. Every little tidbit may provide clues worthy of further investigation. I think every prospective buyer needs to draw his/her own conclusions and suffer the consequences. Without detailed analyses and research in advance, the likelihood of disappointment increases. That all being said, most users have unrealistic expectations of results, and most of the problems are attributable not to the product, but to the lack of in depth knowledge and experience of the user.

[joshroot]

I don't know the other guys, but I know Tom Abrahamsson personally. And he is a hell of a good guy. I'd respect his opinion on just about anything Leica related.

[mike_wagner2]

As for Roger Hicks, he is eminently practical and un-stuffy...still he has a grand familiarity with Leica/Leitz cameras and lenses, which is a rare combination. If he finds something that works, and works well, it doesn't matter to him how exotic it may or may not be. Advice from a savy source who still has feet on the ground is valuable.

[fred_c1]

Erwin Puts and Roger Hicks, high priest and deacon of the Faith, though some say Puts is leaving the church if he hasn't left already.

[Robin Smith]

Well I like reading most for their opinions. A few comments: Gandy knows a lot about equipment, but whether he actually uses them to take pictures I really don't know. Tom A uses them...but seems to like everything (maybe everything IS good?) Erwin Puts is a good lens tester, but I have little idea how good a photographer he is.

[ryan_peck]

As a recovering lens hoarder, one thing I always try to remember is that some of the greatest

photos ever taken- Cartier-Bresson, Capa, Winogrand, Queen Elizabeth(!), etc...-were taken

with what many would now consider inferior lenses. Kind of puts things in perspective.

 

Of course, I tell myself this, but I still can't seem to own less than four 50mm lenses...

[henri_straat]

Thanks everybody for the informed responses.

 

After reading all of your opinions it seems expert opinion is a good start or guide, but alas not the be all and end all.

 

However, experts as well as board members also help me learn more about the Leica world/mythology everyday. The more you delve into it, the more intriguing it becomes.

 

Thanks again guys!

[vics]

Henri, just buy one of each 50mm lens Leica ever made, then shoot with the one(s) you like best. I think that's what most of the folks on these forums do, and they seem to like it! I've only bought two, but I'm poor and kind of a newbie.

Best, Vic

[michael_dimarzio]

Gandy is unabashedly opinionated and he insures his readers understands this.I like to read his pages and he is a great guy to buy stuff from. Hicks' advice is practical, down to earth and fun to read, he seems like a really nice guy, I wish he would post more on PN.

 

I enjoy reading their opinions, I could never gain the experience they have but their opinions are usefull to know what I'm buying into. It was Roger's opinion that moved me from buying a used M7 to a used MP.

 

But for great advice, ask here. I asked about a goggled 135 vs. a non goggled, and the wealth of knowledge and information that I received was much more practical then the "stars" give.