Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have had many digital cameras over the years, going back about 8 or 9 years. And many more film cameras going back 30. I currently have 3 digital and 3 film. They are all ultimately just tools to do a job, and they all have individual idiosyncrasies. Each one may require slightly different methods or usage to get the 'best' performance. In addition, each user may have differing opinions of what 'best' is. Tina's comparison showed me something I never would have thought of (using a lower ISO and underexpose) in order to reduce noise. This nugget made the thread valuable to me. In my case, I have no plans to use an M8, if I acquire one, at ISO 2500. I would not remove the M8 from my wish list just because of Tina's comparison. But I almost certainly would try the above trick. Removing the M8 from my wish list because of one comparo at ISO 2500 would be akin to saying I have removed the Ferrari 360 from my wish list because it doesn't accelerate from 140 to 200 quite as fast as a Porsche 997 Turbo. I don't plan on accelerating from 140 to 200 more than 1% of the time, so that test is not relevant to me. ;) Lastly, I would like to see where the factory claimed that ISO 2500 performance would be equal to Canon 5D performance at ISO 3200. What did the factory claim, can someone point me to it?