Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/05/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
> Dick:
> I can just tell you that I just came back from Santa
> Fe where I took similar shots that I have taken for
> years with my R4,R4SP,R3,etc.. The R8 produced much
> better results and the difference with Matrix is
> quite striking. For me, and my skill level, it is a
> vast gain.(these were all with the same lenses....).
> It can be fooled I am sure and the IB tells what do
> avoid as does the Nikon F5 book and a recent review
> in Pop. photo demonstrates with the F5....Overall,
> though it's major gain, at least for me.... chip
It probably is a major gain for most folk, Chip. I
owned Canon EOS1n before selling it off some 2-3 years
ago to finally go Leica.
When I acquired the 1n, the first several rolls were
devoted to purposely trying to fool the matrix. It was
astounding, to me, how hard it was to fool that
system. I really had to work at it.
A camera's success in auto mode will mostly depend on
the programing of the matrix. A well designed matrix
with a lot of skillful programing based on as many
exposure scenarios as possible will really work. As
old as the Canon technology was with the 1n, one must
think that the Nikon F5 and the Leica R8 are better
yet. (Bigger memory for the scenarios and better
designed matrices.)
If you want auto exposure (I didn't) I can't help but
think that the R8 will get you there, happily.
- --
Roger Beamon
Naturalist & Photographer
Docent: Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
Leica Historical Society Of America
mailto:beamon@primenet.com
Thought for the day:
Who needs rhetorical questions?