Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
Some photos from my clearly inferior Konica Dual Hexanon 21/35. I'm sure I'd have done better using a Tri-Elmar.
Konichiwa by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Scrutiny by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Tokyo by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Konichiwa by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Scrutiny by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Tokyo by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr
Ansel
Well-known
If you read the full article instead of taking sentences out of context you will see that Ken speaks very highly of this lens.
Archlich
Well-known
Whatever he speaks of the lens, he starts with the judgement "inferior".
Roger Hicks
Veteran
"Fuji has made cameras for Hasselblad, and sold under the Hasselblad name, like the X-Pan."
For a given value of "made". They were made for both Fuji and Hasselblad by another camera manufacturer, not as well known, but very highly regarded. Alas I had the impression that the third manufacturer didn't want this bruited abroad too much.
The truth is that many manufacturers make/made parts for one another, and often whole cameras, though rarely as high-end as the Xpan.
Cheers,
R.
For a given value of "made". They were made for both Fuji and Hasselblad by another camera manufacturer, not as well known, but very highly regarded. Alas I had the impression that the third manufacturer didn't want this bruited abroad too much.
The truth is that many manufacturers make/made parts for one another, and often whole cameras, though rarely as high-end as the Xpan.
Cheers,
R.
Ansel
Well-known
No he doesn't. He starts of with "This Konica lens is more than capable of creating fantastic images."
And later starts with: "This is the lightest 35mm lens ever made for LEICA. It's also the smallest M-mount 35mm lens ever made for LEICA. It's fast, and a great lens for shooting just about anything."
The "inferior" comments were in relation to certain Leica lenses. Which is fair enough. He did the testing and published his findings.
Highway 61
Revisited
When shooting on film and unless you use Technical Pan @ISO25 developed in Technidol (if you have NOS of both), all lenses (but for well known dogs made by some third party companies) have a resolving power (measured in pairs of lines per mm) superior to any film/developer couple.
So those inferior/superior comments all have to be taken with a grain of salt.
For instance, Leica nuts would be floored with what a $30 Tokina 135/2.8 lens can deliver.
In front of digital sensors, things are different and, yes, some of those lenses now prove themselves to be "inferior".
So those inferior/superior comments all have to be taken with a grain of salt.
For instance, Leica nuts would be floored with what a $30 Tokina 135/2.8 lens can deliver.
In front of digital sensors, things are different and, yes, some of those lenses now prove themselves to be "inferior".
Ansel
Well-known
Yes I agree.. Which I guess is why he qualified his comments with "If you're counting pixels..."
Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Very funny, Mike!
Which camera took that picture?
Which camera took that picture?
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
With some trepidation (I really want to avoid the threat of the 43mm filter thread discussion
) I'll answer by saying: an M type 240....Mike
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Just think of it as The Lidless Eye of Sauron. There's a reason I've covered mine with a touch of electrical tape ... some find that thought a tad uncomfortable (especially in this post-Snowden era).
...Mike
charjohncarter
Veteran
I don't know much about lenses, but aren't some film 35mm lens fine with film but have color and edge sharpness problems when used on digital. I think I read that film wides don't do as well on digital, especially RF wides on mirrorless or RF digital.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
At what f/stop? Almost any lens is good at f/5.6 and smaller, and most lenses are good enough for most purposes.
That said, you're exciting aliasing in the small type, an indication of high resolution and a reminder of why competent sensor designers use low-pass filters or other methods to suppress aliasing.
kermaier
Well-known
I guess it would've been a bit much to cover the red dot on that truck with gaffer's tape....
kermaier
Well-known
Yes, I wonder whether Ken R. considers the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar LTM lens to be a crappy Japanese knock-off from Cosina or a holy artifact of German engineering.
ZeissFan
Veteran
Regarding the 40mm Sonnar for the Rollei 35 RF, I had read that the lens elements were made in Japan (likely by Cosina, which made the body) with final assembly of the lens being done in Germany. However, I don't remember if "final assembly" included the lens barrel.
Either way, it's a great lens.
The entire Japan vs. Germany argument also came up frequently during the release of the Zeiss Ikon camera.
Either way, it's a great lens.
The entire Japan vs. Germany argument also came up frequently during the release of the Zeiss Ikon camera.
porktaco
Well-known
Scrambler
Well-known
If you mean, "Was the lens barrel made in Japan?" the answer is "Yes." It's a standard Cosina Voigtlaender barrel and the lens cap and hood are interchangeable with some CV lenses e.g. the 21/4.
Agreed.
And Zeiss' position is the right one IMHO: it doesn't matter WHERE, it matters HOW it was made.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Maybe. There are arguments for and against on that one.
...Mike
Dektol Dan
Well-known
Okay, I've read it all to here...
Okay, I've read it all to here...
Ken Rockwell is neither Obama or Rush Limbaugh. Fox news is all about opinion and blame (like this thread): news be damned.
Rockwell is all about 'compared to what' in a world of moving targets, but what I appreciate most about him is that he recognizes and demonstrates that newer isn't always better in his reviews.
Frankly, I like his attitude, and his reviews generally save time lost in long Google searches. He is always a good place to start. It's up to you decide if you've had enough already.
Okay, I've read it all to here...
Ken Rockwell is neither Obama or Rush Limbaugh. Fox news is all about opinion and blame (like this thread): news be damned.
Rockwell is all about 'compared to what' in a world of moving targets, but what I appreciate most about him is that he recognizes and demonstrates that newer isn't always better in his reviews.
Frankly, I like his attitude, and his reviews generally save time lost in long Google searches. He is always a good place to start. It's up to you decide if you've had enough already.