Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Jun 25, 2005, at 6:01 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: > Well one thing I find both amusing and revelatory about it is what > it says > about Putz's lack of understanding of pretty much anything having > to do with > photography in the real world. I agree with BD on several counts here. First off, if noise or grain is that detrimental to image usefulness - note I did not say total quality - then none of us would have been using 35mm in the first place, and this would be a medium or large format users group. Yes, very noisy, pixelated early digital images were inferior to good 35mm, but that boundary has long since been crossed in favor of digital, IME. Second, after using that borrowed R-D1 with my Leica M lenses, and a slew of Canon film lenses on my 10 and 20Ds, I can say that if there is a loss in quality versus dedicated digital lenses, then it is a difference that makes no difference. The Leica lenses and better Canon film lenses both perform brilliantly in digital capture. As a former Olympus user, I do hope that Maitani's emphasis on compact cameras of highest quality comes back into their company culture. In other words, I hold out hope that Oly will produce that extremely high quality digital camera in a smaller, easy to carry size. In the meantime, my Sony DSC-V3 just chugs along as my very competent point and shoot rangefinder substitute. Will von Dauster Boulder, Colorado