Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D. Yes, if it were a rangefinder. I have all sorts of cameras but find most creativity with a rangefinder. Now, if Canon would use the 5D chip and processor in a reasonable sized rangefinder then we can talk. Nikon's aggressive anti-noise degrades the image too much for me, YMMV, at higher ISO's. However, if NIkon issued an anniversary edition digital SP with the same chip as the D2Xs or even the D200 then we might talk again. Alas, my choices are the RD-1 for which I do not get along with or the M8 so I don't really have any choice other than film or digital. Others will have a different viewpoint. Don don.dory@gmail.com On 1/10/07, B. D. Colen <bd@bdcolenphoto.com> wrote: > > But if precisely the same $4800 camera - looked and felt like a film M, > nice > bright viewfinder, solidly built, M lens mount, 10 mpg - with precisely > the > same problems - electronic but no dust or moisture seals, banding, IR > weirdness, green blobs, questionable battery life, need for IR cut-off > filters on lenses, noise levels much, much higher than Canon's, etc. etc. > - > were manufactured by Nikon, Canon, Cosina, or Zeiss for that matter, would > you still call it "a great camera and worth the extra learning curve?" > > > On 1/10/07 1:24 PM, "mehrdad" <msadat@gmail.com> wrote: > > > despite, all of the problems, it is a great camera and worth the > > learning curve extra cost. > > > > On 1/10/07, Colin J <smcj35@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Eric Korenman wrote: > >>> > >>> The recent article in LFI about the M8 takes on three major issues: > >>> > >>> 1) IR - they explain it well and the steps to deal with it. > >>> > >>> 2) Banding - they say it was fixed in the hardware upgrade > >>> > >>> 3) 8 / 16 bit capture.. > >>> > >>> ..Well here is where I think they turn on the smoke machine and bring > in > >>> some mirrors. > >>> They present information about how the data is compressed by the > square root > >>> , > >>> but when it comes down to it, it still sounds like a form of lossy > data > >>> compression. > >>> > >>> IE, The chip captures 14 bit data, crunches it to a non-linear 8 bit > form, > >>> which is latter re-expanded > >>> to bit to form the final 16 bit image file. > >>> > >>> So.. Isn't the weakest link in the imaging processing chain an 8 bit > format? > >>> LFI then goes on to say essentially "you won't see the difference > anyway" > >>> > >>> Anyone care to help on the matter? I am missing the point? > >> > >> > >> Eric, > >> > >> The only point you are missing is that no-one should question or > criticise > >> the Leica M8 on this mailing list. We should always be supporting > Leica > >> instead, and saying only nice things about the M8 ... > >> > >> ... like Mr Erwin Puts is now doing, now he is back on the payroll. > >> > >> Yours with a wry smile (because we are not permitted to laugh), > >> > >> Colin > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Leica Users Group. > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >