Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/29

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Digi Low Light
From: Roy Zartarian <rzartarian@snet.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 20:04:51 -0400

After reading yours, I too desaturated poor old Bud and agree that as a 
portrait I prefer the b&w version to the color.  Now I'll print out 
both versions & see which the subject himself prefers.

Roy

On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 04:18  PM, Alastair Firkin wrote:

> Well, I desaturated "Bud" and have to suggest that it is better than 
> one might get at 800 !!!  at least, some of the 800's I've used in the 
> past.
>
> Cheers
> On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 02:47 Australia/Melbourne, Roy Zartarian 
> wrote:
>
>> By the second day I had my Leicanon 10D, I had figured out how to 
>> crank it up to 3200 to see how it would perform.  You know, it's the 
>> same of thing we do after installing a new car stereo system.
>>
>> One of the results has been posted at:
>> http://www.photo.net/users/royzart/pecow/bud.html
>> I didn't apply any sort of noise reduction to the image.  While noise 
>> does appear in the background and in the shadow area under the chin, 
>> I liken it to what I'd expect to see on 3200 speed film.
>>
>> For those who want to see the original, I'd be most happy to send the 
>> original Canon RAW file (app. 6 mb) or the subsequent TIF (36 mb)
>>
>> Roy
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 12:15  PM, Will von Dauster wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 07:10 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
>>>
>>>> Digital is not there yet for low-light, but it's getting there.  I 
>>>> love the depth of field of the M lenses and doubt that can be 
>>>> duplicated in digital, but you never know!
>>>
>>> I would have agreed with Tina on this without reservation until my 
>>> recent acquisition of a Canon 10D, after playing with - er, 
>>> evaluating - one owned by friend Bill Nelsch.
>>>
>>> Its low light performance is, in a word, excellent. To my eyes it 
>>> matches film through ISO 800, and produces usable if pixelated 
>>> images at ISO 1600. At ISO 400 it is at least as good as film for my 
>>> purposes, perhaps better.
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, see 
>> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>>
>>
> Alastair
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html