Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Cool - thats all I wanted, I just didn't like the empty comment :) On Apr 10, 2005 8:22 PM, Don Dory <dorysrus@mindspring.com> wrote: > David, > I will stand by my lemon comments. At PMA 2004 Olympus was really > pushing the E-1. At their stand they had a famous photographer shooting > models and then printing the images out, at 11x14. They were pretty > fine: at the Canon booth they were pushing the 20D, same deal with > photographer and model, but they were printing out 16x20 and 20X30. > Much better image quality at 16x20 than at brand O. > > Ok, accept the premise that the Canon guys had better computer geeks who > were doctoring the images before sending them to print. The DIMA guys > did a comparison test of the E-1 against the Digilux II. Same lighting, > same model, same computer work, same printer: the end result was that at > 16X20 the Digilux II had a better image both in color, lower artifacts, > and in total image quality. It was close, looking at the images, but > the Digilux did have the better image. > > This in no way degrades the Olympus effort, but they really need to come > up with the E-II really soon now, with an improved sensor. The sensor > in the Evolt isn't it however. > > Don > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf > Of David Mason > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 4:36 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] For B.D. > > Did you "try the sensor" though? I mean did you look at the images and > just laugh at that pitiful sensor size? Somehow I doubt it. Those > other points are all good points but have nothing to do with what you > originally said. > > On Apr 10, 2005 5:11 PM, Don Dory <dorysrus@mindspring.com> wrote: > > David, > > Actually, I have tried to like the E-1. It just doesn't work for me. > > :() I like the size, the lenses, but operationally and viewfinder wise > > it just doesn't float my boat. Of course, the only DSLR's that do are > > the D2X and the 1DsMkII viewfinder wise. > > > > Don > > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org > > [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf > > Of David Mason > > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 1:44 PM > > To: Leica Users Group > > Subject: Re: [Leica] For B.D. > > > > I'm just curious - have you actually tried that "lemon of a sensor > > size" yourself? > > > > On Apr 10, 2005 1:38 PM, Don Dory <dorysrus@mindspring.com> wrote: > > > Feli, > > > Olympus is trying to turn the lemon of a sensor size into lemonade > by > > > creating fast glass so that 800ISO at F2 is the same as 1600 as > F2.8. > > > With the emphasis on limited DOF in the fashion world I give them a > > fair > > > chance of pulling it off. Naw, the soccer mom shooting soccer or > > > football will not be able to keep enough in focus at F2, and there > are > > > some really good lenses from independent manufacturers that are 2.8, > > > quite good, quite cheap, and in the other guys mounts. > > > > > > Again, I think Olympus is in a niche market with the 4/3 system. A > > very > > > good system that only a few people will appreciate. :( > > > > > > Don > > > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org > > > [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On > Behalf > > > Of Feli > > > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:40 AM > > > To: Leica Users Group > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] For B.D. > > > > > > On Apr 10, 2005, at 5:07 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: > > > > > > > Boy, there's a shocker!:-) There's only one problem with all of > it, > > > and > > > > I say this as an Olympus whore - > > > Shocking, isn't it? ;-) > > > > > > > thus far, the smaller sensor does seem > > > > to translate into more noise at higher isos. It may well be that > > this > > > > can be overcome, but there seems little question that at this > point, > > > > the > > > > Canon DSLR's provide the lowest noise levels. > > > > > > And that right there is my problem with the 4/3 system. I simply > don't > > > think > > > they will be able to get the noise levels down, given the size of > the > > > chip, > > > especially above 800asa. Both Nikon and Canon are struggling to keep > > > things clean with the slightly bigger APS size. It a shame because > it > > > looks > > > like a very nice system They recently announced a 14-35mm (35mm > > > equiv: 28-70mm) f2.0 and 35-100mm (35mm equiv: 70-200mm) f2.0. > > > No one else is making fast glass like that. > > > > > > feli > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 > > > www.elanphotos.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >