Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Felix wondered: >>What's the nature of the difference >> > between the DMR and a D70/D200? >Cost? There is, obviously, a firmware difference between the Nikon and Leica digital cameras/backs. I like the colouring of both, though the DMR seems to be closer to a Kodachrome... more muted colours than,say, Fujichrome, but a wee bit more accurate, too. But the HUGE difference is that every APS-C format digital SLR out of Japan has an Anti-Alaising filter, to reduce Moire patterns in the photos. The DMR, in keeping with it's MF format heritage (it was designed my Imacon - the big 6x6 camera back maker), does not have one, and used software to solve the problem, if need be. As AA filters work by making the final image a bit "fuzzier" (for lack of a better word) the DMR will deliver much finer detail than any of the Japanese DSLRs - pixel for pixel. As a result, the DMR is most often compared with the 16 mpixel Canon 1DS MkII, in terms of resolution. Not bad for a 10.2 mpixel camera back. :-) And, of course, the DMR accepts Leica glass. True, the Canon's will do that, with an appropriate adapter, but only with stop down metering and no auto-diaphragm. And when you compare the 1 DS MkII, to the Leica R9 with DMR, even new, the Leica is not a lot more, so I'm not sure cost enters into an "apples to apples" comparison. --- David Young, Logan Lake, CANADA Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/ Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt