Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/04/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alastair, I never look at these tests, but I was really moved to do so by curiosity, because of the impassioned defense the DMR invariably gets here. High ISO comparision is as I would have expected. To my surprise, it seems that the D3s has much more detail in the low ISO shots (100&200) as well, and whatever lens you used on it (I presume 70-200) seemed to control flare better than its Leica counterpart as well. Look at the specular highlights above 990. How come? BTW, with the Nikon D700, I start with EV -0.7, but then use the histogram to fine tune exposure. Cheers Jayanand On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 2:22 PM, <afirkin at afirkin.com> wrote: > If you have no interest in 'testing', delete now. This is a quick > comparison of the DMR v D3s. First test is ISO performance. Ok I know not > fair etc. > > First thing I will say, is that outside in daylight the differences were > quite small. This series was done inside in dim artificial lighting. The > images are labeled 100 to 800 then 400a and 800a. The last 2 were done > using Doug's 'shoot at 200 ISO and decrease exposure technique. > The series starts here and you can run forward: look at the image large to > get some idea of what was found > > http://tinyurl.com/3dem7on > > Alastair > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >