Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Ditto on all the small sensor issues - a 10D or D100 with their much larger sensor is going to produce better pics I'm sure than this incarnation of a Leica digital..... Even the Oly E1 too! Still, it has the looks. It has the red dot. :) But at 1800 euros (rumoured) they must be dreaming! AF = yes (thank God they put it in ;)) MF = mechanical ring but the focus is fly-by-wire, using EVF....(not sure if this will work out really..) Boon Hwee - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Dan C Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:56 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] The LEICA DIGILUX 2 is announced Precisely. My experience with these p/s style cameras is that the results are all essentially the same. When one model's output appears to be sharper, or have less noise than their competitors, it is usually because they do intrenal processing in the camera to try and fix these "defects", but personally, I'd rather to the repairs myself in Photoshop or some other image processing software. There are other image factors such as colour fringing which appears in some models but not in others which might be important to some people. But the limitations of these small chips are common to all of the cameras using them. My biggest complaint, and the reason I still use film cameras, is their inability to allow for shallow DOF. Other issues important to me are operational factors such as autofocus accuracy and speed (terrible in my Minolta D7, but good in the Leica D1, for example). All the talk of the D2 concerns it's manual operation. But for that kind of camera, AF performance is still an important factor to consider (it isn't immediately clear to me if the camera offers, AF, but it must!). Also, is the manual focus real, or focus by wire? - -dan c. At 08:16 AM 02-12-03 -0700, John Collier wrote: >Actually the small sensor size IS why they have not offered higher >sensitivities. > >John Collier > >On Dec 2, 2003, at 7:47 AM, Eric Welch wrote: > >> Isn't the end result what counts? Numbers like this are irrelevant to >> actual image quality. It's how the lens images. And that being said, I >> find the camera pretty interesting, but the fact that it stops at ISO >> 400 is really bad... >> >> On Dec 2, 2003, at 4:29 AM, Rei Shinozuka wrote: >> >>> what does the 2/3 inch actually measure? the specifications say >>> that their 7-22.5mm lens is the 35mm equivalent of 28-90mm which >>> would imply a sensor 1/4 of the linear dimensions of 24mmx36mm, or >>> something like 6mmx9mm. which is about your guess. > >-- >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 - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html