Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric, > > I can't imagine anyone putting up with a little 6M pixel Bayer pattern > > sensor! > > Well, just because you don't know how to get good results from > them doesn't > mean it's not possible. You weren't paying attention there, Eric. That was said sarcastically...of course I can get excellent results from a 6M Bayer pattern sensor...that's one of the things I DO... > I get results clearly superior in terms > of sharpness > and grain compared to film A TWO pixel camera is as sharp as you can possibly get...so really, sharpness is simply not relevant to the fidelity of the image. Do not hang your hat on "sharpness", it is a manufactured property, and in fact, shows lower fidelity (accuracy of reproduction). > Why call it Bayer pattern? Because it IS called a Bayer pattern sensor when it has an RGBG filter over the sensing elements, which provides %50 green, %25 red and %25 blue information...and that information is interpolated to give you 6M pixels. The sensors them selves are 6M SENSORS, not pixels. > Who > knows that that means besides people who spend too much time on > digicam web > sites? Who knows? People like me who design these things! > > P.S. White balance? Parlez-vous SCANNER? Er, expense? I can > buy a LOT of > > film and processing for $5000! > > Are you kidding? How about $1,500? I would run through that in a > month when > I was working for a newspaper and mixing C-41 and E6 in five > gallon batches. Yeah, but you don't, do you? And...not many people do. You seem to miss the point here, Eric. I never said digital doesn't have it's place, in fact I am one of the proponents OF digital, but the issue is it's NOT better than film in every application, and IS better than film in SOME applications. People WANT digital to be "better" than it is, and it isn't. It is what it is, and it IS, SOMETIMES, the right tool for the job. > You obviously haven't used them enough. Yeah, you must be right. I've only been using them for over 25 years, since I've been designing digital devices for over 25 years, and have a basement full of them. > Scanners cannot remove completely a bad drift of color in unusual light. Why not? > With a Nikon 4000ED scanner, you can't fix the color in many situations. > Maybe with some more high-end scanners that are a lot more money than the > $5,000 you mention. The scanner has nothing to do with it. > When I shot a Leica microscope we sell - which is painted black > and white - > with our D60, the color is so neutral you could mistake the photo for a > black and white image except for the red Leica logo. Film can't touch > digital period for shooting in other than daylight. That's simply not true. B&W certainly is FAR better on film than with digital, unless you happen to have a monochromatic digital camera, which I do...and there aren't many out there, they are mostly all converted from the RGBG Bayer pattern, and are far inferior to film. Now as far as color goes, the new films with the 4th layer are VERY good in mixed lighting. Also, color balance can easily be corrected using tonal curve adjustment after (or during) scanning. > > P.P.S. If you're Mr. Digi now, then why are you on a Leica list that is > > primarily for film camera users, and little Leica re-branded > P&S digicams? > > And when did you stop beating your wife? Never started, she'd kick my ass. > I still own $25,000 worth of Leica hardware, and I just shot some photos > today on film. My only personal digital camera is a Canon G3 > point-and-shoot > (albeit a high-end one). Well, then, how come you're such a digital expert then if you don't really have much digital experience? > With this kind of response, I'm tempted to assume the LUG is still full of > petty ill-will that made me leave a couple years ago. > > Is it? Well, Eric, it's YOU who came across as Mr. Digital...and now, come to find out, you shoot mostly with Leicas and have not much "real" digital experience. There was nothing petty or ill-willed in my response, just statements of reality into this ever mis-represented and mis-understood realm. I also didn't say that one had to understand it to make good use of it, but when claims fly in the face of reality, perhaps an understanding might shed some light on the subject. Austin - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html