Vietnamese lenses?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,181Gear list
Like?
What is behind the price?
In reply to shutterbud, 3 months ago

shutterbud wrote:

DAVID MANZE wrote:

-- hide signature --

I think we can take the Leica/Pentax comparison with a "huge" pinch of salt, but the 31 is a classic very sharp lens of traditional all metal construction and beat he Sigma equivalent, one would expect few problems with it. It's guaranteed after all.

Dave's clichés

I take it as a simple fact that Leica have few peers in the lensmaking business and any which do equal them are very very expensive. According to comparison tests, there is litle difference between the performance of the X Vario lens and M primes costing much more, which is why the Vario has had to be limited in terms of aperture.

I'm not trying to denigrate the Pentax system, simply looking for advice. It would be a miracle if a $500 lens was the equal of a $5,000 lens.

Comparison test in what exactly?

For example, I personally believe that Leica's R system lenses are superior in the artistic quality to Leica's M lenses, and I also place Pentax's Limited lenses above Leica's today's M lenses in that same regard.

You can defend the price of the M lenses by some mathematics, data sheets, charts, etc., and the fact they are hand assembled. But to my eyes, M lenses in last decade or two were made to be boringly sharp, with too milky bohkeh that is predictive and technically correct, but without much character.

On the other hand, Leica's R lenses are a rare work of art, like the Pentax FA limiteds are.

To you it may be the opposite. For example, you like listening to the SACDs or DVDs better than vinyls. Your choice, your taste.

There is no objective yardstick that measures the aesthetic performance of the lens. And there in that regard there is no price that describes that quality: a $500 lens can beat a $5000 lens.

Even a lens that shows PF can be artistically superior to a perfectly balanced lens that shows no PF. If you think that perfectly balanced lens must be *naturally more expensive* because it gets rid of the "defects", then you are correct, but also wrong. You are not necessarily paying for the "soul" of the experience.

Same as an old recording of Enrico Caruso can be far more artistically satisfying to listen and by a order of magnitude emotionally superior to a perfect digital recording of some technically correct, but otherwise boring tenor who is earning 10x more money and 50x more audience than Caruso could ever dream.

I'll take a Leica's old R lens and Pentax FA 31 Ltd over any today's M lens that costs 5x more. Anytime, anyplace. And I'll put the rest of the money into charity.

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow