Re: [Leica] Thoughts on digital and the impact on Leica

["Steve LeHuray" <steve@icommag.com>]

>> .....I suppose which side of the fence you are on means you are going to
>> promote your team.


Austin,

Sorry, my remarks really had nothing to do with anything you said, but
rather the film vs digital debate in general. And I do think that most
people are going to take up a position in this debate.

Regards,

sl
>
> Steve,
>
> You're certainly correct, but badly done testing (or biased, intentional or
> not, reading of the results) is simply unacceptable.
>
> I don't mean to sound arrogant at all, but I'm not on any fence with respect
> to this issue.  I have been designing digital imaging equipment for over 20
> years, and I have done VERY extensive testing in this area, and I know the
> facts first hand.  I KNOW that claim is simply wrong.  I've done hundreds
> and hundreds of tests, and the conclusions drawn by this "article" are
> simply flawed, or misleading at the least.
>
> A VERY poorly exposed, developed and scanned, 10 year outdated high speed
> film that was sitting on the dashboard of one's south facing car, in
> Florida, for a week, before being developed, would probably be inferior to
> an 11M pixel Bayer patterned camera.  Is that "fair" to use images from that
> as the poster child for film?  Of course not.
>
> Also, sharpness has nothing to do with resolution, as I stated in another
> post.  It's something that is commonly misperceived.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
> 
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html