Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
It's not that Leica's lenses don't compare favorably with Hasselblad's
lenses in the image quality they produce, but rather that the film
size of Leica's smaller format cannot compare favorably with that of
the Hasselblad's larger format. So if image quality is the basis of
choice, among the three cameras you mentioned, choose the Hasselblad.
But of course there are tradeoffs (e.g., in weight, size, convenience,
etc.). You don't get ANY image quality if you don't have the camera
with you to take the picture you want to take, and the Hasselblad may
not be convenient to carry around all the time. For that reason I'd
prefer the Leica M System cameras (including the CL) to any of those
you asked about; and I'd start with the 35mm (or 40mm on the CL) and
90mm lenses. They're eminently quick and convenient, even pocketable.
But that's just a personal choice, and your photographic needs may be
different from mine or anybody else's.
Art Peterson
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: [Leica] Opinions Please
Author: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us at internet
Date: 2/18/98 9:23 PM
Hi,
If you had your choice, would be buy a Leica R8 with a 50mm Summicron, a
Hasselblad 501cm with the standard 80mm lens, or a Canon EOS 1n with a
28-70 f2.8L?
Even with the high quality and extreme sharpness of Leica lens, does
anyone believe that they can compare favorably with the image qualities
produced by medium format lens such as those from Hasselblad?
TIA
- -Ray