Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica / Canon Combo
From: "Robert G. Stevens" <>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 17:41:27 -0400
References: <> <>

At 04:14 PM 12/27/2002 -0500, Mike Durling wrote:
>Hey Rob,  Interesting comparison.  You can see some digital noise in the 
>orange stripe in the background and on the goalie's jersey.  Of course 
>there is grain all over the film image.  One is not necessarily better 
>than the other, just different.  The digital file seems to have some edge 
>effects which amplify the apparent sharpness.
>To some degree these factors are manipulatable in software.  I would be 
>interested in seeing what the original scan looked like.

Green and grainy ;-)

>Mike D
>Robert G. Stevens wrote:
>>I developed the 800 speed Fuji and when comparing them, the digital has 
>>the edge at this speed.  Keep in mind that my digital will only make 
>>decent prints up to about 8x10.
>>Both images taken from the same spot with the same lens in the same 
>>period of the same game.  This means the same magnification.  I had to 
>>crop the film scan down to the same size as the digital.
>>The film had a lot more grain and took a lot of work in PhotoShop 
>>correcting the colours and dealing with the grain.  Digital wins here.
>>If I was shooting strobes, scanned slide film would be superior.
>>For list members with high speed internet, below is the full size digital 
>>file, saved as a 75% quality jpeg.  This is right off the camera without 
>>any fancy PhotoShop work done to it. It is about 600k.
>>This is the film scan after having some Photoshop actions done on it to 
>>decrease noise and grain.  These actions also tend to soften the detail a 
>>bit.   I sized it to be about the same size as the digital file.
>>My impression is that if you have the light, shoot film.  Otherwise, 
>>digital does a fine job in difficult lighting, colour balance wise.  If 
>>you are doing nature or scenics, the digital results will disappoint you 
>>unless you are only aiming for making smaller prints.
>>At 07:04 PM 12/26/2002 -0500, Edward Caliguri wrote:
>>>Robert -
>>>     On my email computer monitor (Mac 17" CRT) it looks pretty darn good!
>>>Was that the 400 2.8? Also, when performing your comparison, can you try a
>>>side by side PRINT comparison (either a good ink jet or preferably a Fuji
>>>frontier or Lambda print) and let us know? I find that sometimes monitor
>>>comparisons are not true to form.
>>>     I use the Modular System and 400 6.8 for wildlife, and can pick up a
>>>used D30 body in new condition pretty cheap as folks trade them in; I think
>>>I will now!
>>>     Ed
>>> > I was using my Leica lens with a Canon D2000 digital last night.  It 
>>> gives
>>> > pretty good results.  I was also shooting with an EOS 300mm L lens 
>>> and the
>>> > Leica seemed to do a better job, even on a lowly digital.  I was using a
>>> > Leica to EOS adapter.  These are available on the cameraquest site.
>>>To unsubscribe, see
>>To unsubscribe, see
>To unsubscribe, see

- --
To unsubscribe, see