ALEXSCIFI@xxxxxxx schrieb:
> I disagree with some of the above. Zeiss/Contax have been criticized for not
> paying enough attention to bokeh, not having enough F2.0 lenses,
They have F1.4 lenses instead.
> not using
> LD/ED glass in their telephotos,
They use it, but they don´t clutter the lens with meaningless acronyms
(do you realy believe Sigma has ever produced an apochromatic lens?).
> not having enough diaphragm blades
Isn´t it meaningless to count blades, coating layers etc, what counts is
the resulting image.
> and being
> just a little too caught up in that effete "gold plated" collector-itis that
> the Germans seem to really be into.
Well, Contax is not German at all (the brand is, but not the company).
I´ve no numbers, but I would bet the "collectors item" are sold mainly
outside of Germany (in absolut and relative numbers). In regards to
collector-itis Contax is not like Leica, but anyway we live in a market
oriented society, if there is demand...
> Some cases in point are the highly
> regarded 50F1.4 lens has only 6 diaphragm blades to everyone else's 8,
You say it "highly regarded", so it must be OK
there
> are no 28F2.0
...there was an 28mm/2.0
> or 35F2.0
...but an 35mm/1.4
> or 85F2.0 lenses
...but an 85mm/1.4 and was an 85mm/1.2 (limited edition)
> in the line, and the 180 and above
> have fallen far behind their Canon/Nikon equivalents.
The 300mm/2.8 (for Contax and Hasselblad) is definitly an superior
design.
Regards
Richard
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|