Originally Posted by Patman
I've been using long lenses longer than you are years old and know quite well how to handle them but the Nikon auto focus sucks and the lens simply just doesn't perform."
Hmmm. Well, most of the professional images shot over the last 30 years have been shot with Nikons or Canons. Most of those sucky images in NatGeo magazine. Those many Pulitzer Prize images.
While I shoot Canons rather than Nikons professionally, I can assure you that both systems lenses "perform." I can afford to shoot anything I want to, and I actually own several Leicas and lenses, and I shoot Canon. Apparently most of us just aren't astute enough to know our cameras and lenses don't "perform."
I believe I read here that most professionals don't use Leica's because the glass is too expensive and most of the images you see posted are taken with long lenses on the Canon's and Nikons. Tell me how many 50 year old Canon and Nikon's are you using with 50 year old lenses trying too play catch up and how many of these cameras or lens have never been in for repair or adjustment. Prize winning photos are not picked for image quality but for the drama portraided in them and photos in printed media don't reflect image quality because offset printing just can't duplicate the quality of a photo print. I print my own images, did so with film and now digital, that is where I make the comparisome. PS. Good Night my friends, this old man is going to sleep.
Leica M8, Leica M3, DS, 21mm, f2.8 Biogon, 35mm Summaron, f3.5, 50mm Summicron f2, Col, 50mm Elmar, f3.5, Col, 90mm Elmar, f4, Col, 135mm Hector f3.5, 135 Elmarit, f2.8 w/eyes, M & MR Meter
Bessa T 101 w/50mm Heliar
Ansco Regent, Agfa Apotar 50mm, 3.5
Kodak 260, Olympus E20N, Leica R8, Kodak DCS Pro 14n, Nikon D200
Last edited by Patman : 07-05-2008 at 19:36.