Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/06/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 6/7/07 12:58 PM, "Dave Mason" <leica@dmason.net> typed: > Nathan Wajsman <nathan@nathanfoto.com> writes: > >> That was exactly my point. I am sure the Sigma sensor is better than >> the GRD's, since it is so much bigger. But let's say that I am >> shooting in a situation where I need to set the GRD at f2.4 and ISO >> 400 to obtain a handholdable shutter speed. With the Sigma, I would >> need to set an ISO of 1000 in the same conditions because the lens is >> 1 1/3 slower. So the relevant question for me is whether the Sigma >> sensor at 1000 is better than the Ricoh sensor at 400. And that is >> not guaranteed. And besides, I already have the Ricoh, while the >> Sigma is vaporware at this point :-) >> >> On 7-jun-2007, at 16:33, Rei Shinozuka wrote: >> >>> seems interesting, but why is the lens so darned slow? > > > I think this somewhat misses the idea behind a "point and shoot" > doesn't it? These are not supposed to be professional cameras and its > pretty amazing how good they have become at their sizes. I carry the > Panasonic lx1 of which people complain about the noise - I don't find > it a problem at all because when I want to shoot at higher ISOs I pull > out a different camera - why worry? Its designed for my pocket and > quick snaps - it performs both very admirably. > > Dave > I think when Leica came out the Barnack this was in. A pocketable camera. Which my IIIF is. And also a highly serious camera. Capable of just about everything and anything. All kinds of amazing glass options. A shutter make of rare silk. Precision machined engineering. A classic. A reason why we're all here. To, on the Leica list say "we need to look elsewhere for a pocket camera" is heresy. Or something like that. Something real bad. And or dumb. The problem is the M series. :) Mark Rabiner Harlem, NY markrabiner.com