Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/10/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks Michiel for your opinion, Saludos desde Barcelona Luis -----Mensaje original----- De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org] En nombre de Michiel Fokkema Enviado el: domingo, 08 de octubre de 2006 20:45 Para: Leica Users Group Asunto: Re: [Leica] Spanish Clouds II -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Leica] Spanish Clouds II Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:04:04 +0200 From: Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> Nathan Wajsman wrote: > Hi Luis, > > In that case I am stumped...From my own experience with Rolleiflex and > from looking at people's images, even if the lens may not be completely > on par with modern Leica glass, the larger negative more than > compensates for it. So if you scanned both on the same scanner, I simply > don't understand. Perhaps there is more camera movement with the > Rolleiflex shots? (I always found the Rolleiflex very awkward to > hand-hold). Hi, Just my 2cents. My humble Rolleicord shots scanned on an Epson 4990 produces superior results compared to my leica shots scanned on a Minolta elite 5400. That is of course when all other variables are more or less the same. Tonality, grain, sharpness, it is easily better on 6x6. When I compare to a rolleiflex with a planar or Xenotar, the Leica is no match at all. Off course the Leica has other merits. Cheers, Michiel Fokkema _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information