[Leica] Leica M lenses on the Fuji X-Pro 1

[richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man)]

WHat do you mean by "similar treatment?"

In any case, it stands to reason that X-Pro1 would have better noise at
high ISO than M9.

Since I can probably wait until next year (and honestly, even further out,
if my eyes can "hold out"), hopefully by then clean ISO without much noise
reduction is possible at ISO3200/6400. Here's hoping.

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:22 PM, John McMaster <john at 
chiaroscuro.co.nz>wrote:

> Sean Reid (pay-for site) compared X-100, X-Pro1, M9 and MM with similar
> treatment.
>
> john
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> One camera system can be judged as nosier than anther but that's just how
> the image was handled. One can be temped to over sharpen just as one can be
> temped to anti noise and sometimes get away with it.
> But in this case we're looking at full rez file so we can see easier whats
> been done with it. And in this case too much. Was it Fuji that did it not
> the photographer? So this was a jpeg? In the interface there was no menu
> which said how much sharpening? I bet there was. And I bet it was turned on
> way too high. It would need perhaps to be set to "low" or "off".
> And sharpen to taste later.
>
> Its just darned hard to judge a camera systems sharpness and noise because
> a
> tasteful amount is put into the final image by the photographer. And that
> taste can vary.
>
> - - from my iRabs.
> Mark Rabiner
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/
>
>
> >
> > That is pretty much how Sean Reid analysed it, Fuji are dropping a lot
> > of detail information to reduce noise at high ASA.
> >
> > john
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > To me it looks anti noised a bit too much. In other worlds it would
> > look better noisier. To me its the analog equivalent of putting tissue
> > or dirty saran wrap in front of an enlarging lens. You just don't ever
> > want to do that. You want to see the real grain which is there becuae
> > out of that grain comes the image. Less grain less information which
> > is there; we are just now allowed to see it.
> > In digital its not quite the same. We can anti  noise the noise not
> > grain just a tad to take some of the edgy sandpaper ness off until it
> > gets to be too much and we are cut off from the information we should
> > be seeing in the image. And that in terms of photography from both the
> > craft and art sake: a big no no.
> > It's human nature to want to see all the detail  that was there in the
> > original file rather than to have it smoothed over on us into jelly
> > bean sauce.
> > Odds are we'd not be viewing the image at one to one anyway.
> >
> > - - from my iRabs.
> > Mark Rabiner
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/
> >
> >
> >> From: Gerry Walden <gerry.walden at me.com>
> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> >> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 05:51:03 +0100
> >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica M lenses on the Fuji X-Pro 1
> >>
> >> Richard
> >>
> >> I have uploaded a 6400iso image at
> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gwpics/1X--1075.jpg.html. It is at
> >> full resolution. It is a little more noisy than I would normally
> >> anticipate but I suspect that this is due to the heavy red lighting
> >> chosen by the lighting engineer for this particular gig. All
> >> information is in the usual place in the gallery.
> >>
> >> Gerry
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>