Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]A much better comparison, Thank you! I still hesitate to guess, but will go with the shot on the right. It shows good detail in the legs and face of the players. Thanks! Dan > >Dan was correct in his criticism of the different lighting. I searched my >files and found two images taken on the same field, at the same time of day >in the same lighting. One with an autofocus Canon 300 2.8, the other with >a Leica lens. Guess which is which and what lens was used on the Leica. >Click on the images for bigger sizes. Both were straight scans where I >left the scanner software to figure out everything. > >http://home.istar.ca/~robsteve/photography/Misc.htm > >Regards, > >Robert > > >At 07:11 PM 8/18/99 GMT, you wrote: > >This is a little unfair. The one on the right will of course look better > >since it is taken in direct afternoon sunlight. The shot on the left is > >somewhat underexposed, and is taken in flat lighting. If the shots were > >identically lit I seriously doubt you could tell the difference on a > >computer monitor, if at all. > > > >A more valid test would be with identical subjects shot at identical lens > >settings, and using tripods. > > > >Best wishes > >Dan > > > > > > > >> > >> > Is the Leica picture the one on the left or the right? > >> > > >> > http://home.istar.ca/~robsteve/photography/Misc.htm > >> > >>No question, on the right. It shows up even over the web. > >>Much more snap, much better tonality, better shadow detail. > >> > >>Paul Chefurka > > > > > >_______________________________________________________________ > >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com > > > > > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com