Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/12/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If you wish to compare 2 different lenses/films/cars/dishwashers/etc. you need to use identical roads and conditions/dirty dishes/images. Using different images does not allow comparison, technically. The original poster wanted to know if the Hasselblad images from film ( E6 or C41????) would be equivalent to an M8 when a print is made. No print? No comparison is possible. Because that was what the poster asked as the comparison vehicle.... 4x6 inch prints? Nope. He wanted something like 30x30 for both. JPG's? You are kidding..... not even a remote possibility of comparison. Jim Brick ( who I believe is no longer a LUG member ) uses a Hasselblad. I think Ken Frasier also uses the Hasselblad..... Alastair Firkin also. Do any of them have a M8? I do not think Jim has, although he does 30x30 prints from his Hasselblad. Who and what will do the scan of the Hasselblad E6/C41? A ( Over $25K) drum scanner? Epson $500 scanner? Who is doing the post processing? How much is allowed? How much human capability is allowed? What kind of printer driver? Tuned for what? Who or what is doing the comparison? What criteria? How many samples? I hope I am conveying the difficulty of answering this question......with technical correctness. Anyone can take any picture they want and derive any comparison they wish.... after all, it is a free country. But if you want facts to make an unbiased comparison, it is exceedingly difficult. I stick by my response.. using digital printing techniques makes, in the limit, a $300 P+S camera almost as capable as a $5K Leica M8. And certainly, a Hasselblad image will probably look as good as a M8. The digital printer is the item that flattens the playing field. Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net