Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/11

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

Subject: [Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma
From: philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent)
Date: Sun Feb 11 09:37:05 2007
References: <c59.d579cce.33009fe0@aol.com>

Hi Ira,
Thanks for your feedback. I'll keep that 17-40 in mind.
Not sure about DXO (I knew about it, and it's even Belgian if I'm not  
mistaking) though, because I have plenty PS plugins and actions  
installed already.
Best regards,
Philippe

Op 11-feb-07, om 17:35 heeft ISILVERMN@aol.com het volgende geschreven:

> Hi Phillipe,
>
> As one who resolved my version of the same dilemma with first a  
> Digital
> Rebel and now a 30D, let me add my $0.02.
>
> Like Don, I would endorse the 17-40 unless you absolutely need the  
> faster
> aperture.  The lens is extremely sharp (but with the 30D I don't  
> have to  worry
> about edge sharpness).  What impresses me most is its speed of   
> focus. The
> lens seems to lock on instantly.
>
> In general, the DSLR is a large camera to begin with; you're always  
> trading
> off aperture against size/weight.  So I'd look at the both the f/ 
> 2.8 and  f/4
> lenses and decide for myself if the extra f-stop is worth it.
>
> One other thing I'd suggest looking at with a DSLR system is the  
> DXO Optics
> Pro software.  I believe you can download a free beta version.   
> It's  got an
> optics algorithm that corrects distortion, vignetting ,   
> aberrations and purple
> fringing based on the camera/lens combination (huge  impact on the  
> bottle
> glass kit lens on a Digital Rebel, but still quite  effective). It  
> also has a
> lighting engine that pulls detail out of the shadows  without  
> blowing out
> highlights and a good noise control engine.  The  latest version  
> adds perspective
> controls, which I have not used  yet. Except for the basic optical  
> adjustments,
> all are user  controllable.  DXO also has an excellent RAW batch   
> processor.
>
> I have no affiliation with DXO, just a satisfied customer.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ira Silverman
> Irvine, CA
>
> On 2/10/07, Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be>  wrote:
>>
>> Since I won't be buying an M8, and waiting for an M9 -not  being sure
>> if it will be worth all the bucks, and if it will be full  sensor- is
>> not really an option, I have some decisions to make.
>>  Digital has always been a bit on the side: not that I don't have  
>> good
>>  digital cameras, but the ones that I have, have their quirkinesses.
>>  Until now, that wasn't a problem, because most of the time that I  
>> was
>>  really concentrating on photography, it was still an analog process.
>> But  the beast of full digital has been roaring in my head for too
>> long  now.
>> So I've come to the conclusion that, to keeps things simple  and
>> pleasant, digital is the way to go, even if my hearth still tends  to
>> these mechanical beauties that were made in former eras.
>> I'll  go the Canon 5D route, and I have almost decided on lenses,  
>> too.
>> I'm  pretty sure that a lot of you switched to or embraced Canon, so
>> some  first hand experiences would help to smoothen out the 'fear'  
>> for
>> the  steep costs involved.
>>
>> What are your impressions of the following  lenses?
>> Canon EF 24-70mm L f2.8 USM
>>
>> Canon EF 70-200mm  f2.8L IS USM
>>
>> Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM
>>
>> And, if  you'd only keep one lens on your analog M, which one would
>> that  be?
>>
>> I was thinking of selling everything except for one good M  body, and
>> then buying a Summilux 35 ASPH to glue on it forever. A  perfect B&W
>> street dedicated machine, so to speak.
>>
>>  Other -and wise(r)- suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>  Philippe
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from ISILVERMN at aol.com (ISILVERMN@aol.com) ([Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma)