Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D. i think you are more stuck in the name and in particular this "leica name " every time there is a praise of a leica something you go off thinking that everybody is under some sort spell and the magic red dot makes people say good things. i shoot with more camera brands and lenses than anybody i know ( i love gadgets), and so far i have been very pleased with the images from the M8. i have also been shooting with the pentax k10d and some the pentax prime lenses; oh boy this might be one the best. i have recently bought couple of sigma lenses for in the 4/3 mount and the results have been stunning also. Price is very deceiving these days, both a $20 times and $20k rolex tell the time and both very accurate, why do some people buy a rolex? the same is true about honda element (my favorite car) and a Porsche turbo, both take you place one costs 9 times more. i think price these days is more of a differentiator of class and not quality any more. by the way canon g7 is just awesome and in this list i talk about mostly about leica. On 1/10/07, B. D. Colen <bd@bdcolenphoto.com> wrote: > But if precisely the same $4800 camera - looked and felt like a film M, > nice > bright viewfinder, solidly built, M lens mount, 10 mpg - with precisely the > same problems - electronic but no dust or moisture seals, banding, IR > weirdness, green blobs, questionable battery life, need for IR cut-off > filters on lenses, noise levels much, much higher than Canon's, etc. etc. - > were manufactured by Nikon, Canon, Cosina, or Zeiss for that matter, would > you still call it "a great camera and worth the extra learning curve?" > > > On 1/10/07 1:24 PM, "mehrdad" <msadat@gmail.com> wrote: > > > despite, all of the problems, it is a great camera and worth the > > learning curve extra cost. > > > > On 1/10/07, Colin J <smcj35@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Eric Korenman wrote: > >>> > >>> The recent article in LFI about the M8 takes on three major issues: > >>> > >>> 1) IR - they explain it well and the steps to deal with it. > >>> > >>> 2) Banding - they say it was fixed in the hardware upgrade > >>> > >>> 3) 8 / 16 bit capture.. > >>> > >>> ..Well here is where I think they turn on the smoke machine and bring > >>> in > >>> some mirrors. > >>> They present information about how the data is compressed by the > >>> square root > >>> , > >>> but when it comes down to it, it still sounds like a form of lossy data > >>> compression. > >>> > >>> IE, The chip captures 14 bit data, crunches it to a non-linear 8 bit > >>> form, > >>> which is latter re-expanded > >>> to bit to form the final 16 bit image file. > >>> > >>> So.. Isn't the weakest link in the imaging processing chain an 8 bit > >>> format? > >>> LFI then goes on to say essentially "you won't see the difference > >>> anyway" > >>> > >>> Anyone care to help on the matter? I am missing the point? > >> > >> > >> Eric, > >> > >> The only point you are missing is that no-one should question or > >> criticise > >> the Leica M8 on this mailing list. We should always be supporting Leica > >> instead, and saying only nice things about the M8 ... > >> > >> ... like Mr Erwin Puts is now doing, now he is back on the payroll. > >> > >> Yours with a wry smile (because we are not permitted to laugh), > >> > >> Colin > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Send instant messages to your online friends > >> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > -- ------------------------------------- regards, mehrdad