Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/13

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

Subject: [Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:39:46 -0500
References: <C6A9E9C7.52D0A%mark@rabinergroup.com> <p06230908c6aa3189a222@[10.0.1.199]> <0D984AC4-A065-4311-A904-AA8B335CDDB1@mac.com> <00c901ca1c64$0a373ce0$1ea5b6a0$@net> <702D11A1-78F4-4346-978C-0735359809EC@mac.com> <00ce01ca1c6c$0ab01cc0$20105640$@net>

I'm not really comparing quality of film and digital capture.
I've reached the point where I believe they're incomparable.
As they have completely different aesthetic and technical qualities.
An 8x10, 5x7 or 4x5 transparency drum scanned to maximum resolution  
is in a class by itself.
Putting them on a flat bed scanner is a whole other matter
with its own set of problems - not the least of which is keeping them  
flat
and truly focused.

For me: As said earlier - I'm fully into the digital capture work flow.
When and if I return to film - I'll be making silver prints in the  
darkroom.
Scanning to get to digital no longer makes sense to me.
It feels, to me, about the same as mixing Leica lenses with Canon or  
other bodies;
doable, maybe even occasionally fun - but in the end - a long way  
around.

If you haven't already done so
you owe it to yourself to download
some of the .tif and hi rez .jpg files, available on line,
from these large sensors.
They're quite impressive to say the least.

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On Aug 13, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Frank Filippone wrote:

> I shoot 4x5, still.  ( Still film.  Still an amateur as well.....)
>
> I realize the Schneiders and Rodenstocks are all for view cameras,  
> but now
> the bar is significantly raised, again.  You are comparing the  
> quality of 20
> square inches of film plus scanner to a digi-sensor.
>
> Not as easy a comparison as 35mm or 645 systems.... there is a LOT of
> information in 20 square inches of film......5 times the data as a 2x2
> negative....... and maybe double that for a MF Digi-sensor.....
>
> Just not as easy...... or straightforward..... scanner or not.
>
> Frank Filippone
> red735i at earthlink.net
>
>
> However, when we discuss medium format backs with Rodenstock,
> Schneider or Mamiya lenses
> we're really discussing hybrid view camera systems.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)