Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 10:51 AM -0400 7/21/03, Phong wrote:
>Hi Peter,
>
>> When I first held the latter (Canon D10), all I could think of was
>> "TANK!" Granted, the lens mounted on the 10D was a monstrous, honking
>> bazooka of a 35-70 f/2.8 (?), which I think was heavier than the camera.
>> But I couldn't help thinking that my whole was of doing photography was
>> "small and light," and this stuff was anything but.
>
>Sorry things didn't work out so well for you on the digital front.
>"small and light" are 2 of the atributes I associate with the mythical
>Leica M, regardless of actual manufacturer. Good build quality,
>high quality fast lenses, high quality sensor, bright viewfinder,
>good performance with high ISO are others, and of course a rangefinder.
>Actually, I do not consider the real Leica M all that light either.
>
>Perhaps the new Olympus E-1 digital SLR system with body and lenses
>especially designed for the 4/3 system (18mm x 13.5mm, a bit smaller
>than the Canon D30/D60/D10 sensor) allowing for smaller and lighter
>lenses will provide many of those qualities in a DSLR. We'll see.
>Perhaps you could wait and check that out. Meanwhile, I am "making
>do" with a digital SLR, using prime lenses. Here's a shot over the
>weekend with the D10, with a 28mm lens: (My brother peering out his
>bathroom window).
>
>http://www.phongdoan.com/Photography/Misc/crw_4682-khanh.htm
>(Comments, critiques, etc. welcome as always)
>
>- Phong
I have heard a number of explanations of this '4/3' thing, such as it
being the size of the sensor via some calculations, but it appears to
me to only apply to the ratio of the format. Does anyone know
definitively?
- --
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html