[Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots

[masonster at gmail.com (David Mason)]

Personally, I don't need it - I just wanted to know if Canon was
somehow magically understanding Leica ROMs. :)


Dave

On 6/3/05, Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> wrote:
> David Mason offered:
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots
> 
> 
> > Well, it gives what data it can - but it certainly isn't telling us
> > the lens type, and aperture - just as I thought. So it would be
> > incomplete at best from the canon.<<<<<<<,,
> 
> Guys and gals I know I'm about to ask a completely inane stupid question 
> and
> undoubtedly there will be a million answers back why one needs it. This
> recorded information.
> 
> But here goes:
> 
> I can't for the life of me understand what the heck you'd ever need to know
> what lens, aperture and other miscellaneous information not being read
> camera to camera?
> 
> Isn't the whole action of taking pictures about the final photograph and 
> how
> well you shot it? Surely these other details can't have much meaning for
> anything of logic in how good the end product is going to be? Or was.
> 
> I know people want to know what lens, aperture etc were used right here on
> the list, but the question is some times asked when it's a mere happy snap
> of no meaning.
> 
> Now if there's a specific effect, say blurred action of runners in a race
> and there's a beautiful effect of speed, then yes knowing what the shutter
> speed was can be helpful, if the asking person is going to try this effect.
> I have no problem with this because that's how we learn.
> 
> But having it recorded with the shot is like.... "Who cares? I'd be far 
> more
> interested in knowing it was a damn fine photograph than "what lens was
> recorded."
> 
> OK now all together, thrash me! ;-)
> 
> ted
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
>