Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well I think the lack of an anti-aliasing filter in the DMR just reeks of "free lunch". Those filters are there for a REASON - to eliminate aliasing. The version of the DMR I saw had to have special software to HELP eliminate the effects of aliasing when shooting high-frequency areas of the image - such as the fine mesh of a wedding veil. I will be eager to shoot side-by-side with a DMR with my 1Ds Mk II through the same lenses on the same scenes. I have a 36 x 54 on the wall that suggests that there's nothing wrong with the 1Ds for landscapes. Adam Bridge On 8/9/05, Gib Robinson <robinson@sfsu.edu> wrote: > Tina, > > [you wrote] > > With RAW files any subtleties of tone or sharpness can be adjusted when > they are developed. > > I love using RAW (I only shoot RAW) but, to my eye, the 20D images don't > have as much subtlety of tone (low mid-tones & below esp) as I want for > outdoors. I don't think that simply upping the MP count will do it. I > suspect it has to do with the extra filter and maybe with other decisions > that Canon made about electronics & CMOS. I've seen a couple of prints from > a DMR that were very impressive & the staff at Calument really does think > the DMR produces a better image than the 1DS Mk II. They've seen both, used > both & printed from both. I'm not saying they're right but I can't dismiss > their conclusions either. I want more proof: "Ocular Proof" as Iago was > fond > of saying to Othello. Would I rather wait till October and pay 2.5K for a > body that would match the DMR? You bet; but I'm not yet convinced the next > gen. Canon will get me there.