Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/06

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots
From: creativevisions at verizon.net (Michael J Herring)
Date: Mon Jun 6 17:09:17 2005
References: <BEC87360.164DC%mark@rabinergroup.com> <e11358c849f3d838304d3001f1a8480f@earthlink.net> <03a801c569ee$1ee7ae40$0400a8c0@robertbxucevjs> <bde563d3457f6cd25b0c18825eb1082f@earthlink.net>

It is definitely due to the optics. Why do you think Schneider and
Rodenstock have redesigned most of their large format lenses? They new
that
demanding professional photographers would require lenses of this caliber
for their new digital backs.

Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Feli" <feli2@earthlink.net>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots


>I think part of the problem is with the lenses. Digital image capture
shows
>up every flaw
> and limitation in a lens. Obviously if you are only using the center of
a
> lens that was
> designed to cover a receptor bigger than the capture device it is
sitting
> in front of you are going
> to get good results.  It would be very interesting to see a comparison
of
> some Leica glass vs. the
> equivalent Nikon/Canon lenses. I wonder if some of the problems we are
> seeing is due to the glass.
>
> feli
>
> On Jun 5, 2005, at 9:46 AM, Robert Meier wrote:
>
>> Phil Askey makes some other points about the smaller sensor that are
>> important:  that image quality with a smaller sensor is considerably
>> better because of two things -- the lens is not as good near the edges
>> and those edges are not used with an APS-size sensor, and the nature of
>> the chip is that chromatic aberations increase at the edges of a larger
>> sensor with the more oblique angle of light from wide angle lenses.   I
>> think these considerations go into his great enthusiam for the D2X.
And
>> he may be right -- less than a full 24x36mm sensor might well be
optimum.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> As for APS size chips, I think we have just seen the high water mark
of
>>> that format with the
>>> D2x. Noise at anything above 800 is simply going to be higher than
with
>>> a x1.3 or FF chip
>>> and the only way to combat it is with a aggressive filter, which kills
>>> detail. Personally I think
>>> the future belongs to x1.3 and full frame chips.
>>>
>>>
>>> feli
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________
>>> feli2@earthlink.net      2 + 2 = 4        www.elanphotos.com
>>>
>>>
>>> no archive
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
> ________________________________________________________
> feli2@earthlink.net      2 + 2 = 4        www.elanphotos.com
>
>
> no archive
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 371 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)
Message from feli2 at earthlink.net (Feli) ([Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)
Message from robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier) ([Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)
Message from feli2 at earthlink.net (Feli) ([Leica] Re: Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)