Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/09/17

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

Subject: [Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast
From: red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:54:42 -1000
References: <16432066.1379440783221.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <SJtS1m01B0AFV7C01JtT4Q> <43F3F75BD79C4D228E236CA85EEA2087@billHP> <SLQF1m0170AFV7C01LQGd0> <7D23C2D0A72240F8966AB0258442D69A@billHP>

Very good input. I selected the 18-35 because it weighs half the 17-35. 
While I will pixel-peep, especially in evaluation mode,  but the final test 
will be for purpose. 

Frank Filippone

On Sep 17, 2013, at 10:33 AM, "Bill Pearce" <billcpearce at cox.net> wrote:

> Certainly true. I have the 17-35 2.8 and the 70-210/2.8 V1, both of which 
> are considered by most denizens of the net as something not fit for their 
> grandparents. I will argue the point and can show large prints to prove 
> mine. I would get either and be happy. I also have the current version of 
> the 24-120 and it produces fine results as well. Of course this is for 
> those who like to take photos and print them for viewing. If you shoot 
> photos for the purpose of carefully examining at 100% pixels tirelessly, 
> which I don't think you do, all bets are off.
> 
> Bill
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Filippone
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:23 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast
> 
> Thanks for the inputs. While Zeiss glass is good, weight/ FL range  goals 
> can not be achieved without zoom lenses
> 
> Frank Filippone
> 
> On Sep 17, 2013, at 9:55 AM, "Bill Pearce" <billcpearce at cox.net> wrote:
> 
>> All lenses have strengths and weaknesses. The Zeiss lenses are superb, 
>> with perhaps more resolving power than the Leica equivalents and 
>> certainly more contrast. Colors from the Zeiss lenses pop in a way unlike 
>> any other lenses. Many Nikon lenses are also quite good in a very unlike 
>> Leica way. Nikkors seem to me to be somewhere near to the Zeiss lenses, 
>> but with more flare and a bit softer. At least the Leica lenses I have, 
>> like me several generations away from state of the art, are certainly 
>> sharp, but without the dramatic contrast of the Zeiss lenses. I will say 
>> that although I love my M9, I have some photos from my D3 that measure up 
>> quite well.
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Filippone
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 1:52 PM
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast
>> 
>> Every point you made is correct. If I can prove to myself that the lenses 
>> are acceptable, I can take the next step: rent/ buy/borrow a D800e and 
>> test system vs system.
>> 
>> What I have not directly said is that I am skeptical the Nikon optics 
>> will hold up to a comparison with Leica. So I am starting at the weakest 
>> and (luckily) least costly point. Work my way up from there.
>> Note that while the Nikon offers more pixels, i believe it is the FW 
>> algorithms that make a significantly bigger  difference to IQ. IMO the
>> Major contribution. The reality is that the FW works on all lenses. 
>> Better quality optics reflect in better IQ in the same FW environment.   
>> IMO, the DMR, with Imacon ( think I have that right) FW is a big/ biggest 
>> difference to why the DNR has great IQ. (And why the Hasselblad line is 
>> so highly regarded in MF).
>> 
>> Thank you Doug for challenging my technique. Keep me on target.
>> Frank Filippone
>> 
>> On Sep 17, 2013, at 7:59 AM, Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Frank Filippone wrote:
>>> 
>>> Good input Doug. Thought long and hard about the point you are making. 
>>> The problem is that to test using a D800e would require a $3k investment.
>>> <<<
>>> 
>>> Rentals are a good way to dip your toes in the water.
>>> 
>>> The adapter is basically an empty tube. No IQ effect.
>>> <<<
>>> 
>>> If it's the proper thinkness and the front & back surfaces are parallel
>>> 
>>> I also believe the increased resolution of the Nikon and the absence of 
>>> the IR filter will show the Nikon body to have of increased IQ compared 
>>> to the Leica.
>>> <<<
>>> 
>>> Best to verify this assumption.  There's more to image quality than the 
>>> number of pixels, as DMR users have been saying for years.
>>> 
>>> Doug Herr
>>> Birdman of Sacramento
>>> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast)
Message from billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce) ([Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast)
Message from billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce) ([Leica] OT. Nikon screen brightness and contrast)