Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots
From: s.dimitrov at charter.net (Slobodan Dimitrov)
Date: Sat Jun 4 10:24:16 2005
References: <BEC74E67.1068%bdcolen@comcast.net>

Speaking o f which, have you read that..."Kodak has today confirmed  
that the DCS Pro SLR/n and DCS Pro SLR/c digital SLRs have been  
discontinued and will no longer be manufactured."  Support stops in  
2008. Thanks for the memories Kodak. Point and shoots have longer  
shelf lives!

http://tinyurl.com/a987m

Slobodan Dimitrov
Studio G-8, AGCC
http://sdimitrovphoto.com



On Jun 4, 2005, at 9:26 AM, B. D. Colen wrote:

> The 20D may not have the build quality of the EOS1DMKII and other  
> "pro"
> cameras, but in terms of image quality, it is among the best of the  
> best.
> I'll be the first to admit I'm impressed if the DMR can match the  
> 20D image
> quality - then we'll at least know that for only $4K more, Leica  
> can produce
> half a camera that matches a 20D in image quality. ;-)
>
>
> On 6/4/05 12:00 PM, "Slobodan Dimitrov" <s.dimitrov@charter.net>  
> wrote:
>
>
>> Couldn't agree with you more on this. But I would of liked to see the
>> DMR stacked up against a professional camera. Comparing it to the 20D
>> just doesn't inspire much confidence with me.
>>
>> Slobodan Dimitrov
>> Studio G-8, AGCC
>> http://sdimitrovphoto.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 3, 2005, at 7:15 PM, Ted Grant 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Leica DMR vs. Canon 20D comparison shots)