Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]i checked reviews and yourright my 17-35 F4.0 scores better then the more expensive 16-35 s On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Nathan Wajsman <photo@frozenlight.eu>wrote: > Hi Simon, > > I have had the 1.4/24mm and the 16-35mm Canons. Both were L lenses, i.e. > allegedly top of their line. Both were awful. The 24mm a bit less awful, > except at f1.4, the very reason I bought that lens. The 16-35mm was just > plain soft. My experience was not unique, judging by comments on the > Miranda > forums and elsewhere. My 12-60mm Olympus is superior to either Canon lens > at > the wide end. > > Cheers, > Nathan > > Nathan Wajsman > Alicante, Spain > http://www.frozenlight.eu > http://www.greatpix.eu > http://www.nathanfoto.com > > Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 > PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws > Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog > > > > On Dec 20, 2008, at 9:42 AM, simon jessurun wrote: > > Quite true Mark. >> Nathan nothing wrong with Canon wide angles just with (canon) autofocus >> and >> wide angles .Autofocus hardly ever gets it right with wide angles. >> Find it totally useless as well and use Merklingers infinity focussing >> method.Then the results are quite good.Here is a image of a Canon zoom >> lens >> image not the top of the bill but quite adequate imho >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/animal/canon/B_001.jpg.html >> >> best,simon >> >> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 7:22 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> >> wrote: >> >> Talking about the "quality" of the M8 sensor against the "quality" of the >>> sensors most serious amateurs and pros are using is a blurring of a >>> simplification of the issue. >>> Like talking about the "Quality" of a film Hasselblad over a Canon >>> camera. >>> Or the "Quality" of a Nikon over an Olympus FT. >>> "Quality" has surprisingly little to do with it. >>> Its real estate. And not location location location but: >>> Size of the plot. Acreage. Square feet. Square yards. Meter. >>> FORMAT. >>> The build of the camera has little to do with it. >>> The wonderfulness of how flat it holds the film.... >>> >>> A cheap termite ridden 4x5 will give a way superior image over roll film >>> every time... With a fungus ridden optic on it. It doesn't even have to >>> try >>> very hard. Tap dance on your wet negs on your darkroom floor. Its hard >>> to >>> mess of the brilliant superiority of sheet film. >>> >>> The M8 is a half frame camera. Digital. But half frame >>> The rest of the serious shooting world has moved up to full 24x36 frame. >>> The sensor can be really great which I'm sure it is but its not going to >>> go >>> up against a sensor twice its length across. >>> It's not going to go up against a HALF ASSED sensor twice its length >>> across. >>> >>> In another time warp dimension What if Barnack decided not to go "double >>> frame" which was what 24x36 was then called then but was intractable in >>> the >>> ongoing working movie film frame size at the time called "single frame" >>> or >>> 18x24???? >>> We'd not be talking about Barnack at this point because no one would have >>> heard of him and this would be the Leica historic list not the Leica >>> users >>> list.. >>> Leica would have been quickly eclipsed by Nikon and Canon and Pentax in >>> the >>> 30's and it would be a distant memory of a microscope company who made >>> real >>> high quality half frame cameras in the 20's then went under in the 30's >>> depression. >>> And that's what could happen now. >>> With the S2 aimed squarely at one out of 100 thousand pros and serious >>> amateurs who have a decimal point less cash to blow on gear than is the >>> price point of the S2. >>> 20,000 big E's. >>> >>> What does Leica have which is going to go up against a Nikon D3, D3x or >>> D700 >>> with a 14-24 2.8 ultra wide zoom on it >>> or a Canon full frame with their ultra wide zoom on it? ...... >>> .... A Zoom Super Wide Angle EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM AutoFocus Lens? >>> >>> >>> (whatever Canon has which is going to go up against Nikons 14-24 2.8 >>> you're >>> going to have to tune in next week for. As that's how long it will take >>> Canon to reply to the Nikon challenge. NOT the end of next summer) >>> Days not seasons. >>> >>> >>> >>> mark@rabinergroup.com >>> Mark William Rabiner >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Lottermoser George <imagist3@mac.com> >>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >>>> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:24:41 -0600 >>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] un-believable >>>> >>>> I'll take the fine detail and dynamic range >>>> over >>>> the high ISO auto noise reduction >>>> every time >>>> >>>> Would I like ISO 64,000 with no noise >>>> AND the M8 detail and dynamic range >>>> You bet. Maybe someday I'll have it. >>>> >>>> For now. Simply love the M8 and the photographs it produces. >>>> >>>> Fond regards, >>>> George >>>> >>>> george@imagist.com >>>> http://www.imagist.com >>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 19, 2008, at 7:06 PM, Sonny Carter wrote: >>>> >>>> The M8 has been out since 2006. So has the D80. Each camera has 10.1 >>>>>> megapixels, decent noise per ISO, but the price was very different. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >