From Canon 1N to Leica R8: a report.

["Lucien_vD@compuserve.com" <Lucien_vD@compuserve.com>]

Pete Myers wrote :

>When I finally bought an R8 body, I felt the same. The body is simply no=
t
up
>to the standards of the Canon 1N in operation. I also found that the R8
body
>had a lot of white cotton glove lint in it when it arrived. I have yet t=
o
>have a Canon body show up that was not absolutely clean and perfect.

>At this point, it was a pain to plunk out another (gulp!) $2K for a R28m=
m
>f2.8 ROM lens. But, I did.

>Last week, I shot the new lens and the R8 for the first time. My wife an=
d
I
>dashed up to Yosemite for a shooting backdrop. While I love Yosemite, it=

has
>never been my favorite place to shoot. But, its a nice place to spend a
few
>days. As a reward to some very hard work in our lives together, my wife
and I
>stayed at the Awahnee Hotel in the Park - certainly one of the nicest
hotels
>and settings anywhere. On rare occasions, its a rough life as a Fine Art=
s
>Photographer! hee hee hee

>And.........the images look more "three dimensional"! You can "see" the
color
>temperature of the light! The images have unbelievable sharpness and loc=
al
>area contrast. And, all the pain in the butt problems with the R8 body n=
o
>longer matter that much now that I see the prints!

>So you see, the next person wanting to know what it is like to shoot a
Leica
>R8 and a Leica lens, rather then a Canon 1N and some great Canon optics =
is
no
>better off then I when I looked at this problem! There is just no way to=

>describe it.

>Also, I must say that the casual observer of the 4x6 proofs between the
Canon
>and the Leica would not see any great, glaring difference. But, the larg=
er
>the print, the more obvious is the difference. To me, the differences ar=
e
>huge. Its a matter of detail in all facets - the contrast allows you to
see
>detail deep into the shadows. The images are sharp, sharp and sharp. And=

it
>all adds up to a very natural looking image with great depth and very
three
>dimensional. You can feel a difference rather then just see it.

>I still think that the R8 body rates a rating of four to the Canon's
rating
>of five. The 1N body is a work of art and is just amazing. It makes the =
R8
>look like a first draft. But, the Leica shutter does go off with a very
>damped sound in comparison to the 1N. So, while it just is not what I am=

use
>to, there are things about it that make for better picture making.

>For action shots, the Canon really shines. =


>For Fine Art Photography, I rather think I will be shooting Leica.


Pete,

I was also this summer in the Awahnee Hotel in the Yosemite Park, with a
R8, a new 28/2,8,
50/2 and 80-200/4.

This week-end, I had the chance to compare my photographies with those ma=
de
at the same moment by a friend who was there with us.
He was using the same film but a Minolta 700SI.(same lab.)
The difference that whe agree whe both see are:

Mine are sharper, more subtle (more difference between the colors), and n=
o
ghost reflexion against the light.

I agree that this is not a fair comparaison, because he was using a 28-10=
5
and a 100-300 with a UV filter + polarizer. (lot of black corner !!)

By the way, before the trip, I had the choice between the Leica stuff and=
 a
Nikon AF + 20-35/2,8, 35-70/2,8 and 80-200/2,8.

And it was the reflexion in the viewfinder of the Nikon and not in the R8=

(against the sun or spot), that decided me to take the R8.

I am very happy of that and  I like the way the R8 fits my hand and the
fact that you have the choice between a motor or not.

Lucien
BELGIUM