[Leica] VictorBlad

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

If I typed somewhere D2x I meant D3x nobody cares about the D2x your right
its history. Its cropped format. Not all that relevant. Old technology too.
But I'm sure they still take pictures the images they've made are not going
to spontaneously disappear from the common culture.
The D3x is full frame.
Very much more than a step up from the D2x. More than two steps up.

I may have been typing D2x on all kinds of stuff making it non sensible.

Mark William Rabiner



> From: Thein Onn Ming <mingthein at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11:08:28 +0800
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] VictorBlad
> 
> I agree, but if you were using 100 year old formula on the plates,
> it'd be blown away by the same camera with sheet provia. You can't
> update the sensor on the V blad in the same way you can change the
> film on the Deardorf.
> 
> All things equal - if we used identical building blocks to make up
> the sensor area - yes, the bigger sensor would always win. That was
> the case with film, because more of the same stuff is always better.
> But this isn't the case, because here the building blocks aren't
> identical. The technology used in the V back is quite a way behind
> that on the D3x sensor. It's the same reason that the D5000
> outperforms the D2x on basis of image quality alone; they may have
> the same pixel count, but there's been another five years of sensor
> development between them. I don't think anybody is going to say the
> D2x is great above ISO 800, whereas the D5000 can be shot all the way
> to the 6400 limit. And there it's only about a stop and a half behind
> the D3. (Heracy!)