Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Getting what you pay for, Leica vs Zeiss, etc
From: kanner at acm.org (Herbert Kanner)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:18:50 -0700
References: <201203311032515.SM43145@CSHORE-MAIL2> <CAFfkXxv02h_cEeSr2dop0qSD0LM41_7oyru=xsCagtNiB587LA@mail.gmail.com>

I enthusiastically second that. I do have a question: does setting a 
color balance in the Leica affect the DNG (raw) image or only .jpg 
out of the camera?

Herb


>  I  leave the Leica color balance at daylight all the time shooting Raw,
>and set the color in Lightroom.  It takes about a second to do, and I
>really like the color that results.
>
>
>
>On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:32 AM, dnygr <dnygr at cshore.com> wrote:
>
>  > This message was originally HTML formatted.  View in a HTML capable 
> client
>  > to see the original version.\r\n\r\nThis post concerns the discussion 
> about
>  > Leica vs Zeiss, German vs Japanese.
>  >
>  > Disclosure: I am a dedicated Leica uses. I use it 98% of the time. I 
> love
>  > the quality of Leica glass.
>  >
>  > I do a lot of photography in poor light. Here is where I start to have a
>  > problem with Leica. Not with the lenses.
>  > The problem is not the quality of the lenses. They perform well.
>  >
>  > It's the Leica sensor. I find the colors are a problem. They are off. I
>  > used a Canon 5D I found its color in those situations
>  > to be better. I still prefer the Leica however. The size of the Canon
>  > annoys me. The large "L" pro lenses annoy me.
>  >
>  > A friend suggested I use the simple 2.0 Canon lens. Compared to the L 
> and
>  > Leica lenses it was a cheap purpose. The thing works
>  > darn well. It isn't bulky and the colors in the dark remain good.
>  >
>  > I may try using Aperture instead of Photoshop with the Leica. That may
>  > solve some of the color problems.
>  >
>  > But having shot with the Canon, I feel I got a lot for my money with the
>  > 35 and still have a lot of change in my pocket.
>  > I feel the Leica is less bulky to use. I don't like the mirror delay of
>  > the Canon. I like Leica lens quality--the three dimensionality.
>  > The Canon however gives me more than I would suspect I'd get for $300.
>  >
>  > Cheers--Doug
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Leica Users Group.
>  > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>  >
>
>
>
>--
>Regards,
>
>Sonny
>http://sonc.com/look/
>http://sonc-hegr.tumblr.com/
>Natchitoches, Louisiana
>
>USA
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

-- 
Herbert Kanner
kanner at acm.org
650-326-8204

Question authority and the authorities will question you.


In reply to: Message from dnygr at cshore.com (dnygr) ([Leica] Getting what you pay for, Leica vs Zeiss, etc)
Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] Getting what you pay for, Leica vs Zeiss, etc)