Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron
From: s.jessurun95 at chello.nl (animal)
Date: Wed Nov 10 01:29:04 2004
References: <200411091552.iA9FnvZJ064801@server1.waverley.reid.org><Pine.LNX.4.58.0411091221140.10022@mail.2alpha.net><003001c4c6b3$0b7e78e0$4649c33e@sypcom> <25DCEF62-32EC-11D9-92AB-0003938C439E@btinternet.com>

Frank,
I didn,t try to get in to that debate.
I just wanted to point out that with a hybrid system you might have the best 
of both worlds in a cheaper system.
Thanks for your reply.
simon

> Well Simon,
> this is the sort of theoretical presentation that stopped me trying out 
> digital for a long time. I won't bore you with the history, but I 
> eventually did. Digital is MUCH more than the number of pixels (for a 
> photographer anyway). The prints I get from my Digital SLR are excellent 
> and whilst I am sure the theoretical resolution may not quite match the 
> very best slow films, for handheld use in variable light the digital 
> solution is superior. I judge this from prints. I am an engineer, and I 
> find it useful to reflect on the fact that if theory and practice 
> disagree, the theory is wrong. The area where film still beats digital 
> IMHE is dynamic range, but the problem with film is the difficulty in a 
> real life situation, of exploiting this benefit.
> I travel a lot and notice, in people I meet, a profound difference between 
> people who have travelled the world and those who have not. Those who have 
> not tend to have a stereotyped (some would say brainwashed) view of other 
> countries based on the education system in their own country. Those that 
> have travelled and have seen things for themselves have a more realistic 
> view of the places they have seen.
> The digital- film debate seems to be similar. Those who have not used 
> digital, and I refer here to digital SLR with reasonable size sensors, not 
> P&S devices with sensors the size of a fingernail - compare them to a 
> Minox or 16mm film compact, not a Leica 35mm please, have a quite 
> different view.
> I enjoy using my Leicas but I usually get better prints from my digital 
> SLR.
> Frank
>
> On 9 Nov, 2004, at 23:22, animal wrote:
>
>> Well  if you buy a new R8 for 1700 US$ and the new digital back for 4500? 
>> and have no need for fast sports action you would be off a lot cheaper 
>> then any comparable system I think.
>> According this
>> http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information 


In reply to: Message from pklein at 2alpha.net (Peter Klein) ([Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron)
Message from s.jessurun95 at chello.nl (animal) ([Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron)