Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/23

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: "standard camera"
From: Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:36:15 -0800

paulm.franz@ps.ge.com wrote:
> 
> > 16: Minolta Maxxum 9 (the new pro camera just introduced - Hey, basis for
> > an R9? It's got stuff the F5 and EOS1n don't have!)
> >
> Have you had a chance to review this camera?  I don't know if I would take
> the plunge into Minolta pro cameras until 

I remember looking through a British book Wildlife Photography(er?) of
the Year where tech details were listed along side the pix. 
Interestingly, Leica almost non-existant and, to my eye at least, the
Minolta pix seemed to have the finest reproduction, exhibiting that
smoothness that Leica is noted for.  Which made me wonder.  

I have often noticed that Leica pix don't always reproduce well in
publications, in color, at least.  BW seems to be wonderful.  I
mentioned this to a Brooks Institute graduate who knows more about the
technology of photography that anyone I've ever met (and does consulting
for Nikon, Hasselblad and produces a line of underwater strobes).  He
said, "of course," and explained very carefully in terms only Erwin
might understand why Leica lenses were not good for color reproduction
by printing press, but were great for prints, especially BW.  Guess I'll
have to have him go over the reasoning again.  There might be some
interest (and argument) on the list.  

donal
- -- 
Donal Philby
San Diego
http://www.donalphilby.com