Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I profile all my cameras; under those conditions the Leicas produce a slightly wider gamut than the Canons, and therefore more accurate colours. As for lenses, most Canon wides are quite poor. The only ones that are reasonable to good are the 35/1.4, 24 TSE II and 17 TSE, and those are the only ones I now use. I've tried the Zeiss 21 and 18, but both are rather bad with respect to distortion and so mostly unusable for me. At least the 24 and 17 Canons have very little distortion. Henning On 2012-03-31, at 5:33 PM, grduprey at mchsi.com wrote: > Same here. > > Gene > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sonny Carter" <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 10:44:28 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central > Subject: Re: [Leica] Getting what you pay for, Leica vs Zeiss, etc > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > Henning Wulff henningw at archiphoto.com