Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/09/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I debated as to whether I should have the temerity to comment on the MM rendition. I'm not trying to be a smart ass here; it's just that I'm talking to professional photographers with a level of experience that I cannot possibly match. Having said that--the first few shots that I saw publish some weeks ago from the MM were to me a bit disquieting. They had a level of contrast in details that I just was not used to seeing, and I'm not sure I liked it. In the comparison shots you published, Tina, it is clear that at the level of fine detail there is a greater degree of contrast from the MM. I do not know whether software could bring that up in the M9 shots. I also have not seen that kind of detail from film (35mm) with the exception of fully exposed (!) XP1. Herbert Kanner kanner at acm.org 650-326-8204 Question authority and the authorities will question you. On Sep 2, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Tina Manley wrote: > PESO: > > I put up some comparisons shot with the MM and M9. All used the same > lenses (mostly 90/2.0) and same exposures - usually 320 ISO. I used Silver > Efex Pro to convert the M9 ones to B&W using the Neutral choice. No noise > removal or sharpening. Auto Exposure in LR4 on each one. > > I can definitely tell the difference in the raw files. I'm not sure what > you can tell from small jpegs but here they are: > > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/145788353 > > and the next 7. > > C&C greatly appreciated. > > Tina > > -- > Tina Manley, ASMP > www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information