Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/06

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

Subject: [Leica] High ISOs Comparison
From: ericm at pobox.com (Eric)
Date: Wed Dec 6 16:38:57 2006
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20061206085853.025bd838@infoave.net>

Tina:

3600 for the Canon?  Do you mean 3200?  I can't see that 3200 is anybody
than 1600 underexposed by a stop, so I now longer use 3200.

What I have found is that the same sharpness I could get with my M6 + 35mm
at 1/30th of a second requires 1/60th of a second with my 5D for a single
shot.  Rangefinder vs. SLR.  Advantage, Leica.

What I have found is that with careful technique, I can usually get a sharp
image at 1/30 or 1/15 with my 5D if I slowly squeeze off several frames in a
row.  Advantage, Canon.

With my Leica, if I could see it, I could focus.  And shoot it.  Not quite
so easy with the 5D.  Even with a 35/1.4 lens and the non-default focusing
screen that makes focusing faster lenses easier.  Advantage, Leica.

Somebody had posted comparison shots between the M8 and 5D over on photo.net
that favored the M8 by using a slow shutter speed and shooting wide open..
The $3400 35 'lux beats the $1100 Canon 35/1.4L wide open.  The thread has
since been deleted, but it did illustrate there certain times when the Canon
high ISOs don't make up for mirror slap and lesser lenses.



--
Eric
http://canid.com/

Replies: Reply from firkin at ncable.net.au (Alastair Firkin) ([Leica] High ISOs Comparison)
In reply to: Message from images at InfoAve.Net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] High ISOs Comparison)