Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/10/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The pics are nice, Jean-Michel, but I do not think that they are better than they would have been with digital. I maintain that for colour photography, digital is superior to film (at least when we are looking at 35mm). Cheers, Nathan Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/ YNWA On Oct 29, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Jean-Michel Mertz wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've just posted a series on Venice - film, leica IIIc (1946), Elmar 35 - > 3,5 (1938) ... Well, I was wondering whether film did not, sometimes, > depending on available light, time of day, etc. put digital to shame ... ? > Thanks for your comments (the pics are classic postcards of a place > everyone has photographed hundreds of times!). > Jean-Michel > > <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Jean-Michel/VENISE/F1000031.jpg.html> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >