Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/11/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Getting to this a little late, I can see that your Leica images are sharper looking. I was starting to think it was a focus issue, but I think it is the glass. If you look at the decoration on her sweater in http://www.dmk26.net/tmp/IMG_0482.JPG you will see a bit of a flare. Were the D60 pics taken with a consumer zoom lens. Looks like a thin haze of vaseline. I do find the difference in size a bit distracting and when you unsharp mask you change what we see so this makes the comparisons a little more difficult. You might try resizing yours to the same magnification as your friend's and showing us an unsharpened scan. Even turn the Ice off. We can tolerate a little dust. Interesting comparison! Mike D Richard F. Man wrote: > Not digital bashing as I will probably pick one up some times next year. > Not digital worshipping either as I don't have one and just spent some > $$$ or an M6 and a Noct'. > > Anyway, some interesting experiments this last weekend. We have some > costuming friends came by and took some shots outdoor in the park, and > then I set up the Studio flash setup in the house and shot some more > pictures. A friend was shooting the indoor flash pics with his Canon > D60. He tends to only shoot at around 2000x1300 (~2.5 MP) instead of the > full 6MP since he doesn't normally print them out. For this shoot, I > used Astia 100F, and as usual, I bulk scanned them (all 7 rolls) at > around 2200x1400 resolution and then down sampled them for web. If > someone wants a print, I rescan them at the full 4000dpi and print. > > Interesting things: first of all, the D60 color is more saturated (which > is what he set it up for), and more importantly, more accurate. The > NikonScan software tends to add blue when scanning but even looking at > the slides themselves, Astia 100F does not have the "punch" and some of > the accuracy. Second, the difference with the details are pretty > amazing. For example: > http://www.dmk26.net/tmp/IMG_0485.JPG > vs. > http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/richard/tony/IMG018.jpg > > I did some minor USM sharpening for the web presentation (and a little > unsharpening is always needed since I have ICE dust removal on), but > it's not just sharper, but more details. We checked a few other pictures > and the difference in the detail is consistent between the 2 cameras > (actually 3 as I used both the M6 with the VC 75/2.5 and M7 w/ Summicron > 50). I didn't use the 90/2 AA indoor since the flash sync is only 1/50 > and I wasn't sure I get good result with the 90/2 because of that, but > no doubt the difference is there too. He used a Canon 50/1.8 prime, > which is about 80 mm equivalent on the D60. Since most 50mm lens are > excellent, I think the difference in details is probably due to the > resolution difference with the film vs. digital sensor. > > Now even though our resolutions are similar to start with, the fact that > he did not use full 6MP may have an effect. It would be interesting to > do some comparison using full 6Mp resolution. We plan to do that at some > pints in the future. > > // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, > please use richard@imagecraft.com) > -- > 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