Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/07/13

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

Subject: [Leica] digital M and backward compatibility of old lenses
From: mark at (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Tue Jul 13 23:02:36 2004

> For a couple of years I used a Fiji S602Z for real estate photography.
> IMO, our website has the absolute best images of any competing company
> in our market. Even so, I had to use an aux lens to get the necessary
> wide angle interior shots and I wasn't thrilled with the loss in quality
> when compared to the Fuji lens alone. Not that they were bad; they
> simply weren't as good as I wanted. I wasn't able to afford the high-end
> interchangeable lens SLR digital cameras so I purchased a Sony F-828
> with the Zeiss lens. It met my minimum requirements of a 28mm or greater
> WA and permits complete manual control. I often use bounce flash for
> shadow-less interior pictures and the Sony does OK in that department.
> The quality of the images are a huge improvement over the Fuji with aux
> lens. (The Fuji zoom lens is very good but it just isn't wide enough.)
> While manufacturers seem to be concentrating on zoom lens that allow
> taking pictures of subjects located in the next telephone area code, my
> need is for a wide angle of 24 - 21mm. I wish they'd give more thought
> to that end of the spectrum. A zoom of 21 - 105mm would suit me just
> fine and I believe it would have a market. Maybe there are technical
> reasons that limit the WA end of lens design. I don't really know.  But,
> I do know what I need and a 200+ mm lens ain't it.
> _______________________________________________

This just seems to be a lot to go though for the ultra minimal requirements
of real estate website photography other than the need for a real wide lens
and the knowledge to point it level at the horizon and chop off the bottom
of the street. Or fix the perspective in Photoshop.

I just checked out the Century 21 website which looks the way most of them
look I  think.
You click on a 100x200 pixel image of a house and it blows up two 200x300.

200x300 px is a mighty 4 inch wide image on the 72px screen but at 240 say
for printing an inkjet that's and 1.25 inches on the long side!
(a wallet is 2x3in!)
That's a 175K RGB file! .71 megebytes!

Why not use a cardboard ultrawide?

Mark Rabiner
Portland Oregon

In reply to: Message from doubs43 at (Walker Smith) ([Leica] digital M and backward copatibility of old lenses)