 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
A thousand Natinal Geographic photographers can't all be wrong...
:)
Follow Ups:
Without taking away from anything, National Geographic photographers have not used Leica for years. Some years ago, there was some communications between the LSA and a group of NG photographers about the demise of the quality of NG photographically and of the regulars I don't remember any using Leica. They seemed to have gravitated to Nikon and Canon for the most part. I think 1 or 2 were using Contax. The discussion was started b/c there was a noticable shift in terms of the quality of both the subject matter, the artistic components and a loss of the Leica look of the final images. FWIW I am a Leica and Rolleiflex user.
That story speaks volumes, Brian.
Like in the hi-fi biz, I suppose alot of it comes down to who has the most bucks for good PR.I was watching a fantastic nature documentary on PBS.
The filmaker was using Arri/Zeiss and at the end of the program was an ad from the sponser of the program-Canon. SO this of course leads the viewer to believe that Canon optics and/or cameras were used in the documentary.
I should have known better than to post this type of subject, ie, my car is better than yours,etc...
At this point in time, I feel that nearly every manufacturer has quality gear to offer, and depending upon one's photographic needs, there is something for everyone. I am also happy to see the Zeiss name become a household name due in large part to a brilliant marketing move with Sony. Up until now, a company that makes such superb optics was known mostly to Hassleblad users and a handfull of others. And I am not saying that other companies do not make superb optics in these modern times.
If optic history interests you at all, do a google search on Carl Zeiss company. There is some amazing and little-known gems to uncover in their 157 year old history. That they invented and own the Patent on Planeterium is one bit of trivia. Aspherical elements is another.
I still love my little Nikon FM, though! And the original Nikkor 105 2.5 is still one of my all-time favorite fashion/portait lens. It's so sharp that Not using soft-focus is not an option!
They invented those things, but how long ago? One of the problems with patents is that they run out in 15-17 years. Now anybody can, and does, use aspherical lenses. Zeiss operates in a niche market, their name still means something; but in general, the world is passing them by. Kind of sad, really.Jerry
I wouldn't feel to sad about the Zeiss Corp, really. They are in great shape.
Hassleblad and the fashon magazines will never go away, nor the Zeiss lenses used with them.
They make the world's best medical/scientific microscopes that cost a fortune; and they supply Zeiss-designed lenses for affordable Sony cams.
Then of course their is the movie industry. And so on. Niched market perhaps, but a nice niche to be in.
The coating that gives Zeiss optics the edge in color fidelity is still under their patent, I believe.
They tend to spend more money on R+D rather than advertising.
Another bit of trivia is that Zeiss Corp is the only optical company that publishes MTF charts on every lens they produce.
They will probably never have the name recognition of say Canon and the rest, but will always have a strong, albeit quiet, presence concerning optics.
Thanks for your response, Jerry.
Try to have a sober discussion. More Photojournalist carry Canon or Nikon film and/or digi.
...and more folks buy Bose speakers than any other brand...
Canon and Nikon are good little cameras by all means. No arguement there.
:)
most Streophile readers own Maggies.
Hmmmm...well, I own two Leicas and three Nikons, and when I REALLY have to be sure I get the image, I'll grab one of my F2's every time. I'll admit, though, that yesterday, in fact, my 24-year old Nikon motor drive failed while I was on a shoot. And I was upset, until I realized that the thing had lasted 24 years.... Yes, Leicas last like crazy too (Zeiss hasn't built any camera that I know of since the Contarex died in the early 70's), but there's a solidity about Nikon equipment that is reassuring, even if their motor drives are wimpy....My son, of course, can't understand why any manufacturer would build a camera that would last more than four or five years, and for modern digital cameras, I guess that's true...by 2010 a 20-megapixel camera would probably be obsolete.
| Register / Login |
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
