Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/05/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 09:54 PM 5/26/2003 +0200, someone wrote: >I've not yet tested this camera >with my R lenses, with an adapter, but it could be the best of two >worlds, specially the 21-35 Vario Elmar truly better than Canon 16-35 L >I would like someone to SHOW ME (or anyone) the difference in finished >images, between using the 21-35 Vario Elmar and the Canon 16-35 L, on a EOS >1D body. I do not believe that a digital sensor has the ability to collect >enough of the right kind of image data that signifies or plays-up the >differences between these two lenses. Truly stunning digital images are not >the result of a particular lens and sensor, they are the result of in >camera and out of camera image processing algorithms. >Jim Hi Jim I suppose that some automatic email system wrote the first line who, at least, in my country, could be understood as bad manners, instead of saying Felix, or John, or Peter wrote! Anyway "someone" it's me Felix Lopez de Maturana and as I am not Austin, much more ignorant than him, I cannot defend my point of view so strongly. I was referring to EOS 1Ds and when the comparative test has be done I'll be pleased to SHOW YOU the results. Up to now my experience is that digital high end cameras, combining good optics and big sensors, produce incredible pictures so I thought that improving one of them should improve the output and I have some experience as I'm user of a rather large Leica equipment, not to mention Hasselblad, Linhof, Rolleiflex, Nikon, Canon, Contax, etc. Kind regards Felix PS: has nowadays the courtesy any value or am I perhaps a old-fashioned man? - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html