[Leica] Highly Intelligent Crop Factor Overview

[Montie]

Amen. 

Montie

"...choose tools that suit you, and don't constantly put down
others' choices as inferior. It suits THEM! In other words, to each his
own.  After that, just go out and shoot....

Cheers
Jayanand

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 3:10 AM, George Lottermoser <
george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote:

>
> On Jan 3, 2015, at 2:50 PM, zoeica at mac.com wrote:
>
> > Here's my issue with full vs crop on the mirrorless cameras. Sure I
> would love the Sony 9gazillion high iso BUT Sony is too limited on lenses.
> F/4 Zeiss? WTF dudes? Yes I know I can put Leica lenses on it however
> there's no freaking way I'm gonna try a focus a manual 90mm or 135mm lens
> while someone is moving around like crazy. I just can't do that for a job.
> IMO Sony needs to get the ball rolling on some pro lenses without having to
> buy some expensive AF adapter to use other lens brands.
> >
> > Fuji's F/ 1.2, 1.4 lenses and now finally (ahhhhhh the light has been
> let in) the amaze balls 50-140/2.8 IOS. Holly freaking Nikon lenses that
> sucker is fast and sharp. And it's just as good or perhaps better than my
> Nikkor 70-200 /2.8 VRII. And it's smaller and lighter!! Dare we even get
> into how freaking on target Fuji's color is or the fact that the electronic
> XT1 shutter goes to 32,000!
> >
> > End rant.
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris Williams
> > www.zoeicaimages.net
> > 504-231-6261
> >
> > ----- Reply message -----
> > From: "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz>
> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> > Subject: [Leica] Highly Intelligent Crop Factor Overview
> > Date: Sat, Jan 3, 2015 3:16 PM
> >
> > I talked to my dealer about my findings with the X-T1, if I was coming
> from APS-C Canikon then I would have been very happy with it, it did not do
> much wrong and is small/light. However I have M(240) and a few M lenses and
> the Fuji is reasonable but not up the level of Leica (subtlety, fine detail
> and colour), if I did not have that comparison then things may have been
> different. It also depends on what you shoot, f8 and there would be less
> difference but the way I tend to shoot there is still a significant gap
> between the images produced, but the difference would be reduced in web
> jpegs or most printing...
> >
> > john
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > 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:
> >>>
> >>> ;-)
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY
> >>>
> >>> Montie
>
> Yes. Each format IS and ALWAYS HAS BEEN and will continue to be
> "different."
> Whether film or digital sensors.
>
> Different focal lengths required to produce larger image circles.
> Different depths of field achieved at any given aperture.
> More or less fine detail and/or subtle color hue differentiation.
>
> Bigger sensors do deliver "more."
> Newer CMOS sensors do deliver higher ISO performance with less noise.
> CCD sensors do deliver a unique edge;
> and and "film like" noise pattern.
>
> SIMPLY:
>
> Choose your tool(s);
> from the vast array;
> that have always been;
> and remain available.
>
> Produce your photographs, craft and/or art.
>
> Show us what you have done with your tools;
> on line; in prints; or books; or boxes; or galleries.
>
> I am currently and thoroughly enjoying having my 'blad 500CM,
> 40mm, 80 mm, 135 mm and 150 mm out of moth balls.
> Having wonderful flash backs as I look at that large ground glass.
> Click that mirror release; followed by that between the lens compur
> shutter.
>
> And amazed when looking at the digital files
> from a 7 year old 36.7 x 49 mm CCD sensor
> which I can also hang on my Cambo Ultima
>
> Do I wish it were the latest and greatest CFV50cm? Sure.
> Am I thrilled to be able to work in medium format for $.10 or $.15 on the
> $1.00? Oh yeah.