Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/01/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yes, but there is a bigger difference in size between Leica and FF Canikons (+ lenses) than there is between Leica and Fuji john ________________________________________ I'm not carrying my Fuji to Cuba. It's just too frustrating and unreliable. I'll be carrying 3 digital Leicas requiring two separate battery chargers. It should all fit in a small, carry-on backpack. That and one small roll-on with clothes will be all we'll carry for one month in Cuba. Tina On Saturday, January 3, 2015, Ken Carney <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote: > Then there are the amateur old farts like myself. On my last two longer > photo expeditions I have carried a tripod and a camera bag (a big one) with > two Canon DSLR's, Canon L 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 lenses plus some > primes. I like the results, but holy mother carrying this stuff around for > days is another thing. I also have a Fuji XE-1 with 14, 35 and 60mm > lenses. I'll probably swap out the 60 2.4 for a 56 1.2 and add the 23mm > 1.4. Those plus an extra body fit in a small bag. Plus with a little care > I can still make a 20" wide print. I haven't kept score but I imagine the > total cost is less than an M body. > > Some results of both here: www.kencarney.com > > Ken > > > On 1/3/2015 6:22 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > >> The 1.5 crop factor works out perfectly for people who live with their >> mothers and are shooting the high school newspaper. Though they get no >> respect from the other kids who are shooting real working pro level >> cameras. Though they may be working after school bussing tables to pay for >> them. >> >> >> On 1/3/15 6:47 AM, "Montie Talbert" <montoid at earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> Agree with both, that really is the issue, I think, with 35mm shooters >>> who have been around photography awhile and have collected a boat load >>> of lenses. The 1.5 crop factor sensor state of the art seems to be >>> otherwise >>> sufficient for a lot shooters, including many who make their living at >>> it. >>> >>> Montie >>> >>> I'm with you, Sonny. As I keep saying, my main reason for wanting to >>>>> >>>> upgrade from my M8 to a full-frame digital Leica is so that I can use my >>> 50mm lenses as 50s again. I'm waiting for some sense of how the >>> M9-family >>> sensor delamination issue shakes out in real life before I make the leap. >>> >>> --Peter >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Everything he says is OK, except for me the issue about "full frame" is >>>> that I have this drawerful of lenses designed for that format. >>>> >>>> I was unhappy using Leica lenses on 4/3, m4/3, and the Leica M8 because >>>> (for example) my summicron 35 was no longer the same animal. >>>> >>>> Don't get me wrong, I was perfectly happy shooting my olympus m4/3 with >>>> native lenses; loved the little camera, in fact. Same with the apc >>>> Pentax >>>> Kr with those great primes. >>>> >>>> When I swapped the M8 for the M9, I was back home, and now have >>>> supplemented that with the A7s, so I'm happily shooting with lenses I >>>> haven't used in years. >>>> >>>> Sorry, don't ask me to test, I just put the lens on the camera and go >>>> see >>>> what I can do with it, if I like it, you'll get to see it, I promise. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>> On Jan 1, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Montie <montoid at earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap? >>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY> >>>>> >>>>> Montie >>>>>