jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Jim Watts said:
That's a good way of setting one-shot compensation. I'll have to try it sometime.
I tend to use compensation more to provide "windage" for metering. For example, one of my few regular paying gigs is to photograph member receptions at an art museum. In this museum there's one gallery with white walls and another with light gray walls; if left uncompensated, these backgrounds would influence meter readings enough to give underexposure of the faces of people looking at the exhibit.
So I've learned that when I'm in the white-wall room, I set the compensation dial to +1, and when I'm in the gray-wall room, I set it to +2/3.
I suppose I could do that with a menu system -- it's just more of a nuisance.
I applaud Leica for wanting to keep the layout of the M8 clean and simple -- but in the tradeoff between simplicity of form and simplicity of function, this is one case in which they've leaned a bit more toward favoring form than I personally would have preferred.
sunsworth
Well-known
rvaubel said:
Canon 5D, Leica lenses
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
It's amazing how a single mediocre reviewlet of the M8 can spawn so much response.
ywenz
Veteran
raid amin said:
That's a cheap statement Raid, why are we using RF cameras? Can't we pick up a cheapo Canon SLR film body instead? pffftt
jaapv said:
It's all in how you post process the image. If you don't know what you're doing, you'll end up with an image that has very flat and "digital" look to them. Check out this chic's images from her 20D.. this is what I'm talking about.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gonzale/sets/72057594091957612/
Also, I don't get why people claim Canon applies too much noise reduction and oversmoothing at high ISO.. Compare high ISO images from Canon to that from Nikon or DMR. You will find the Canon file to be noise free and showing just as much detail as the other images. Looks like Canon has found the magical algorithm to reduce noise!
Last edited:
John Camp
Well-known
rvaubel said:
I never expected the Leica to be better than the Canon on high ISO, either, but comments from some of the people who have shot it suggest that it's quite good. When I'm shooting an SLR, I'm typically up to something different than when I'm shooting a rangefinder, and I'm very often using a zoom. With a rangefinder, I'm almost always using a 'lux, which means that I've always got at least a couple of stops more on the rf, than the SLR -- which somewhat negates a Canon's superiority in this area.
I've always thought well-handled Canon shots were very good, and have never really been too offended by a so-called plasticy look. But some people have said that Canon uses a lot of noise suppresssion at high ISO, to get the clean files. I personally think I'd rather apply the noise suppression myself, with an after market program like Noise Ninja.
What I'd like to see from Sean in his eventual shot-for-shot comparisons is files as you'd actually send them to Vanity Fair or Vogue: Take the shot and do all the processing. Don't tell me that Canon (with in-camera noise suppression) is better than Leica (without it) -- take both shots to the final print quality.
I think sometimes that's not done by reviewers because they are uncertain of their photographic skills, so you get lines like, "Here's a quick couple of shots that I took this morning while I was going to to get the milk and forgot to put on my glasses and I was in a hurry to get to work and the sun was in a bad spot, but you can see from these that x camera is better than y..."
Better to say, "This is it. This is all I got."
JC
John Camp
Well-known
sunsworth said:
The plasticy look makes them obviously unusable for anything.
(Not. Nice shots.)
JC
sunsworth
Well-known
raid amin said:
Indeed it is, but I would have thought that a participent on a rangefinder forum would understand the operational differences between an SLR and a rangefinder. The same argument holds with film cameras, why buy a film Leica when you can have an SLR with more advanced functions for a 10th of the price?
Last edited:
AndyPiper
Established
I don't use a rangefinder or a Leica because it has "better image quality" - in fact I mostly use pre-1990 lens designs, including the sneered-at 90 Tele-Elmarit and pre-ASPH 21. Barely different from Canon or Nikon SLR lenses from then or now as regards IQ.
I use a Leica RF because of the little window in one corner. And the various handling and viewing advantages that little window implies.
Even Erwin's flawed samples (R.I.P.) showed the M8 is obviously cleaner than Tri-X pushed 2 stops or Delta 3200 (IMHO).
If one likes making silver prints or projecting slides, the fact that digital ISO 1600 may be slightly cleaner than film ISO 1600 is immaterial.
By the same token, if one likes using RF's, the fact that this or that SLR has slightly better image quality is immaterial.
It will be of some interest to see how the M8 stacks up in the realm of digital imaging. Noise being one factor, but only one of many.
But I would not switch back to SLRs even if they offered noiseless ISO 4000 for $500 - except for those things an SLR has always done better (400mm lens or life-size macro).
I use a Leica RF because of the little window in one corner. And the various handling and viewing advantages that little window implies.
Even Erwin's flawed samples (R.I.P.) showed the M8 is obviously cleaner than Tri-X pushed 2 stops or Delta 3200 (IMHO).
If one likes making silver prints or projecting slides, the fact that digital ISO 1600 may be slightly cleaner than film ISO 1600 is immaterial.
By the same token, if one likes using RF's, the fact that this or that SLR has slightly better image quality is immaterial.
It will be of some interest to see how the M8 stacks up in the realm of digital imaging. Noise being one factor, but only one of many.
But I would not switch back to SLRs even if they offered noiseless ISO 4000 for $500 - except for those things an SLR has always done better (400mm lens or life-size macro).
rvaubel
Well-known
ywenz said:
I take back my comment about Canon having a "plastic" look to their files. They do a hell of a job in the noise reduction department, especially in color. Leica's implementation of software algorithms to deal with noise, moire and sharpening issues are critical to bringing out the full potential off the Kodak sensor.
Incidently, I have a special version of the Canon 20D developed for astronomical uses. It is called the 20Da and has an enhanced noise reduction algorithm that effectively increases the ISO sensitievity by one stop with NO reduction in resolution. I have taken pictures with the very high resolution canon 90mm TS that resolve a star down to one pixel.
Rex
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
It is not so much resolution-destroying noise reduction,nor loss of detail, it is strong filtering in front of the sensor combined with the character of the sensor type. Don't get me wrong, I find the Canons very impressive camera's and large prints from my by now obsolete 10D can only be called excellent -certainly not flat, with a near-midformat grainlessness and up to A3 size plenty of resolution, but somehow, after a while they seem to me -totally subjectively- boring (for want of a better word) in a way that for instance Nikon digital prints are not. My analysis is that it is the type of sensor. It is more like comparing film brands.
ywenz said:
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I wouldn't trust E.P.'s photos either. His web image posts are, to put it gently, to make an amateur blush. I'll wait for something more reliable on this arena for, geez, would you believe DPreview?anabasis said:
sdai
Established
There's absolutely no need to make such a big fuss about some "random thoughts" from Erwin Puts ...
rvaubel
Well-known
sdai said:
The only reason that anyone is making a fuss about Erwin's pictures is they are the only verified files coming from the M8. Beggers can't be choosers.
I wish someone with a little more technical savy would violate Leica's NDA agreement by sending their M8 files to an anonamous Email address.
If any of you beta users want to talk to me about the weather my email address is Wrecks@#*%$.com
sdai
Established
rvaubel said:
Agreed ... but the reaction on the Internet is really, hysterical.
I've no doubt that many sources will give the camera some really glowing reviews but, just in case, just in case ... dpreview only gives it an "Above Average" rating, will you cancel your pre-order?
I know I won't ...
ywenz
Veteran
sdai said:Agreed ... but the reaction on the Internet is really, hysterical.
I've no doubt that many sources will give the camera some really glowing reviews but, just in case, just in case ... dpreview only gives it an "Above Average" rating, will you cancel your pre-order?
I know I won't ...
THis is also the reason why Ricoh GRD has such a cult following. The M8 will be a cult camera, nothing more.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
ywenz said:
Ah! But a cult I'm happy to belong to -have done so for 35 years already, really....
raid
Dad Photographer
sunsworth said:
Steve: I fully understand the difference between a rangefinder camera and a SLR camera. On the other hand, I have always stated that it is my personal view that I refer film based photography. To me, when using film, a rangefinder camera is quite different from an SLR. Adding the digital part to the M camera is not something I am looking for. I realize that many people think differently.
Raid
raid
Dad Photographer
"That's a cheap statement Raid, why are we using RF cameras? Can't we pick up a cheapo Canon SLR film body instead? pffftt.
ywenz"
============================
Respect other people's right to express their opinions if you want anybody to respect yours, ywenz.
Raid
ywenz"
============================
Respect other people's right to express their opinions if you want anybody to respect yours, ywenz.
Raid
S
sreidvt
Guest
rvaubel said:
Hi Rex,
That will depend on the individual. Yesterday I was shifting it around every few minutes to hold the shutter speed and aperture settings I wanted. Better that a camera not impose its preferences on the photographer. The tail isn't supposed to wag the dog.
Cheers,
Sean
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
What is a cult camera? The one people take to a Rocky Horror Picture Show event? One that they used to film "Eyes Wide Shut"? One that Jimmy Swaggart would use? One you use for voodoo ceremonies?ywenz said:
What is a cult camera? I can understand a camera having a cult following. But a cult camera? ::scratching head::