[Leica] Is ASA 200 the new 100 ?

[vick.ko at sympatico.ca (Vick Ko)]

Hmmmm.  The beginning of the end of digital?

Mind you, "good enough" may satisfy 90% of the paying consumer.  The
remaining 10% may, and will, pay for better performance.  

I just hope that R&D continues for film and film based cameras.

....Vick




-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Greg Locke
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 9:31 AM
To: 'Leica Users Group'
Subject: RE: [Leica] Is ASA 200 the new 100 ?


...now, you see Frank?  This what confuses me about all of this. To me,
the files out of my D100 are no better than a decent 400ASA colour neg
film when scanned to the same resolutions.  ..go figure ...c'est le
guerre

What bothers me more is that 200 ASA in the D100 is not the same as 200
ASA in film.

The meter in the dSLR's do not read the same as the 2 Minolta meters, 2
F4 meters and 2 Leica meters I have tested it against.  I've done it
outside, I've done it in the studio with softboxes.  If I put the camera
on manual and use the reading from the hand meter, the camera meter
shows about a stop over exposed and, indeed, the image file is about a
stop over exposed.

I now have one meter for film shoots and one for digital shoots which
have been "dialed up" to reflect "digital photography" 

The only reason (none engineering, that is) is that digital cannot
capture the same dynamic or tonal range or as  film so it just craps
out.

Maybe this might resolve itself with 24X36mm sensors.
...and maybe in the new higher megapixel camera.

The final conclusion?  DIGITAL SUCKS!!! 
And I have been giving SERIOUS consideration to going back to film and
scanning because its just not working for me.  ...and its noticeable in
my work. The stuff I shoot with digital lacks the same energy and
spontaneity mostly because I have to spend too much time thinking about
the camera and what it will do in this situation. 

Contrary to those who say its getting better, I say its not. Why?
Because they took a flawed engineering idea (less then full 35mm frame)
Said it was "good enough" and then pushed and pushed until they got
something "acceptable".

If you are going to do this than you can't use standard 35mm format
lenses and form factors because the expectation is that it will perform
the same and with the same principles as 35mm photography.  

...and its clearly not.

The ideal digital camera in the 35mm form factor would perform all
functions, human interfaces and deliver the same image expectations
regardless what was placed behind the lens.

If the Leica R back was a 24X36mm sized sensor it would have achieved
this objective. At least it retained standard photographic control
interface.


Greg Locke
St. John's, Newfoundland
http://blog.greglocke.com
-----------------------------
Independent journalism from
Newfoundland & Labrador