Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>eric korenman wrote: >> But what about the color fringing? >> Isn't it awfully prominent at high contrast borders? >> Do the D2x and MKII exihibit this degree of fringing? >> >> Eric > Eric Fringing depends in my experience more on the lens you are using that on the sensor of the camera.or perhaps it's better to say that on the the combination of a lens and a sensor. The Sony F828 was prone to fringing however the excellent Carl Zeiss designed zoom. A full format of big pixel density DSLR does not forgive nothing to the lens and therefore is too prone to fringing unless the lens is excellent what happens in the case of Canon 1Ds and 24-70 zoom. I've found more difficulties with extreme wides like 14,15 and 16-35 mm where some times, not always the fringing appeared. Less in the prime. I cannot use my Leica 21-35mm in the 1Ds because it hits the mirror in its travel but with my EOS 350D I couldn't get fringing. Unfortunately is a equivalent 34-56 and it's not enough wide. With the Leica digital back it will be 28-52 something better. Not enough time of the D2X for conclusions but, being the sensor APS size, and however his excellent quality delivers less resolution and more noise. Standard lenses like my Nikkor 17-35, 28-70 and 80-200AFS are use only in the center of the covered image so their vignetting and sharpness is comparatively better than in Canon. Nevertheless I do prefer the Canon. Concerning the images up to now published on the WEB from Leica digital back I've seen artifacts and over sharpened images. Too much unsharp mask perhaps and however is too soon I think not they are better than Nikon/Canon, but the lenses? There is the true difference. Regards Felix