>>3739335> If you wanna believe that the average is Nikon or Canon 50mm is better than a Leica’sThat's not at all what I said. I'm not talking about averages.
The hill I'm willing to die on is that a $2000 Leica lens won't significantly outperform a $2000 Nikon or Canon lens at the same focal length and aperture. I'm not saying that a Summilux-M f/1.4 is going to outperform an EF 50/1.8 II, but the Canon is going to cost you $80 and the Leica is gonna cost you $4400, so that's not really a fair comparison. Compare the Leica 50/1.4 to the Canon 50/1.2 (which is still about three grand cheaper) at f/1.4 to match and the Canon's going to be about the same.
And both of them are going to be so sharp that the limiting factor is much more likely to be the skill of the photographer, so it doesn't really matter either way.
