Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/11/21

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital back for Leica lenses
From: "Sam Krneta" <skrneta@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 09:17:18 -0600

Thanks for your input Phong. If you ever get to the Chicago area I'd be
more than happy to look at your pics. 

Sam Krneta


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Phong
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 7:45 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital back for Leica lenses

Sam, and others interested in digital,

Austin and Jim Brick are the resident experts on digital imaging
technology.
I learn quite a few things from their posts on the subject, though I
have been
wondering about Jim's relatively low presence.  Then just a short while
ago, 
someone posted that he is actively on "something digital that would be 
of great interest to photographers", the nature of which he cannot
divulge yet
(misquote entirely mine).

From my limited though serious practical experience with digital
photography,
I affirm that  the equation of megapixel numbers versus film is
incomplete.  
You really need to bring the medium and size of the final output into
the 
equation.   

Even then, the equation is still very incomplete.  There are
applications where digital 
would be a poor choice, pixel resolution not withstanding.  In my case, 
with my equipment (current Leica and Canon on film, vs. Canon 3 Mpixel 
digital SLR),  I have learned to avoid digital if possible when I want
some 
highlight details, when I want certain B&W look, when I need to shoot at

high ISO, especially in low-light, when I want long exposures (say 5
seconds 
or longer), especially in low-light, when I want to use low ISO (which
means 50 
these days), when I want slides, when I know for sure I want prints
11x14 
or larger.  That looks like a long list, but account for less than 25%
of my
photography in the last 12 months.  

Even at 3 Mpixels, print size 8x12 or smaller, I do not  decide 35mm
film 
vs. digital based on image quality, or resolution.   I would use  medium
format 
or 4x5 for that.   My best digital prints equal my best film prints.
And my worst
prints, well you don't want to look at them anyway.   I would be more
than
happy to show my digital prints to any Luggers in the Boston or Montreal
areas
(or Austin, or Bucharest, or NYC, or Reading, PA, which I visit several
times a year)
In fact, if I ever meet you, I will insist :-)

And I am very happy now that I can use my Leica R lens with a digital
camera:
http://www.pbase.com/image/7255136


- - Phong


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Sam
Krneta
>
> Austin,
> ... 
> Does that mean that we are nearing a threshold in CCD development as
it
> relates to size, using today's format benchmarks? At what resolution
> would the laws of physics start working against the 35mm format? Or at
> least the use of that format as a benchmark? Are we ever going to see
40
> megapixel CCDs based on the 35mm format? I once read that digital had
to
> get to 40 megapixel to equal some of the finer grained 35mm films,
mind
> you I read that quite a while ago, when we were still being amazed by
2
> megapixel cameras. Personally based on the quality I've seen using my
4,
> 5, and 6 megapixel cameras I'd guess that at 20 most film would have a
> hard time competing.
> ...
> BTW: How do you know so much about digital? Any good websites for
> someone to learn the basics, something like a CCD Design 101? 
> ...


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html