Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]He had a Canon man shoot Canon, and he shot the Nikon - I would read the review carefully before reacting, and I get a feeling from reading your posts that you do have a bias towards Canon - thats no bad thing, I have a bias towards Nikon, because I have shot with the damn things for 25 years. Please do continue using Canon, but dont misrepresent what others have written to prove your point. Cheers Jayanand Govindaraj Chennai, India ----- Original Message ----- From: "F?lix L?pez de Maturana" <FELIXMATURANA@telefonica.net> To: <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 3:43 AM Subject: [Leica] Re: OT :news and news >> Well finally the guy from Luminous Landscape got his hands >> on a D2x to test,it blew the Cannon 17MP camera away. They >> said it was the first digital camera to perform well in low >> light. They said now there is no reason to shoot film, >> none. Noise is so low. The D2x was also sharper than the >> big Cannon. It is now the DSLR that all others will be >> judged. > > Hi George > I've paid my best attention to this article. I knew the information given > very often by Bjorn whose arsenal you can see in > > http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html > > He's without the shadow of a doubt a Nikon man. I paid attention to his > opinion about Nikon gear but I think it's the first time he uses Canon > gear. You know that many Nikon user are suffering such a thing like a > inferiority sensation against other Japanese brand. I have a clear idea of > the potential of both. Besides being a Leica user -three bodies and nine > lenses- I have a wide experience in Nikon -ten bodies and twenty five > lenses- *and* in Canon -will be Cannon when Leica will be Leicca- and > actually I shoot film with my R8 and mostly with 21-35 and M7 and seven M > lenses. Digitally speaking I've used Canon D30 and 1Ds and now the 1Ds > MKII. I have had too in my hands the Nikon D2X and in my arsenal is, too, > the 17-35, 28-70 and 80-200 2.8 Nikkor zooms. All this is not a > presumptuous gear exhibition but just the way of showing my point. I'm a > Canon *and* a Nikon user and I have no bias. > > Coming back to the so called comparative *test* I see: > > - true better noise in EOS at 3200 asa > - lack of consistency in the sharpness comparative due to different sensor > size and different lens coverture : none of image qualities give me a > rigorous conclusion > - a bigger vignetting in Canon due mostly to the full format size and > simplified in only two lenses. > - the big mistake -due to the habit of the tester of not using but Nikon- > of not considering the different in camera sharpening : bigger image > quality. > > The hard reality belongs to the laws of physics. More pixels in a bigger > sensor makes a more detailed image. The less in camera processing produce > images apparently with more softness and really with more information. You > have to work more with the software but finally the pictures are exactly > what you wish. The final output is the one you wanted. This is, IMHO, the > issue Leica and Imacon guys are dealing with. How to get the best of a APS > size sensor with 10Mpixels. I can be wrong. -I have not still shot with a > Nikon D2X - but I'm not very hopeful about his superiority. I'm almost > sure the R Digital back will be better and just in case I'll add to My R > camera. Meanwhile I'll continue using the !Ds with Canon or other lenses. > > Regards > > Felix > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >