Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/07

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Crude Film/Digital test, Leica/Canon
From: Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 14:13:18 +1100

I have long suspected that clamping Leica glass on digital cameras 
might be the ultimate in "stupidity" from a financial point of view. 
The only real claim for 'reason' would seem to be distortions and 
abberations, which the sensor would pick up anyway. Now I hasten to add 
that I'm not sure, perhaps the wonderful pixel boys/gals can fix these 
optical problems as well ;-)


On Monday, Mar 8, 2004, at 09:24 Australia/Melbourne, JCB wrote:

> Many folks still believe that different (good) lenses will exhibit 
> different properties on digital cameras. They won't. Good lenses 
> (Leica, canon, Nikon, Minolta, Zeiss, etc...) will all look alike if 
> used on the same camera. The pixel spacing and interpolation firmware 
> (in the camera) determine the resolution properties of the resulting 
> photograph. Up sizing software (Genuine Fractals, etc.) can make even 
> larger sharp "looking" images. Your good lenses are much much sharper 
> than 6 to 9 micron pixel spacing on a sensor therefore, it's all in 
> the firmware/software which is fooling you into thinking that 
> different lenses on the same digital camera make a difference. They 
> cannot. And the same lenses on different cameras simply point out how 
> good the firmware programmer, for that camera, is.
>
> Digital is not film. Digital cameras have finite spacing on each 
> recorded pixel. Film does not. Silver halide molecules are not only 
> random, but there are billions of them within a 1 cubic micron grain. 
> Lots of opportunities to record light rays. Lots of levels of density 
> available within each one micron, overlapped, silver halide grains. 
> Film is the only medium that can differentiate between film camera 
> lenses. True digital lenses are dumbed down so that their resolution 
> (MTF) is several times less than the 6-9 micron pixel spacing. Digital 
> cameras (SLR's) that take camera lenses have a lens resolution (MTF) 
> spoiling low pass filter mounted over the sensor. Digital sensors are 
> the great lens equalizer.
>
> When testing lenses on digital cameras for sharpness, you are testing 
> the programmer, not the lens.
>
> All of the large prints that you see from ordinary (35mm style) 
> digital cameras is testimony to the software wizards that can write 
> interpolation software to up-size a minimal amount of information and 
> make it look really good. A silk purse out of a sow's ear! Like making 
> a 20x30 print from a 2.7 MP camera. Basically, it's like 
> slight-of-hand. There simply isn't enough information to make a 20x30 
> from 2.7, 3, 5, 6,... MP sensors. Interpolation programmers are 
> magicians. Look up "interpolation" in the dictionary.
>
> You don't have to believe the above. Your prerogative. But it is true, 
> regardless.
>
> JB
>
> --
> 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