Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/05/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Doug, Sorry that I am asking the question with an apparent answer. Could you elaborate a little on how these pictures showed that DMR @ ISO400 is preferrable than Provia 400F? To my untrained (not due to modesty) eyes, the Provia 400F picture seems to have more noise. But the DMR photo seems to show quite some aliasing, like the reflection from the turkey's eye, the hair at its back, and the highlights on the red caruncle(?)? Or the subjects in the photos helped the Provia 400F. If Provia 400F were used to take the photo of the turkey, the aliasing would be seen also in the digital scan? Thanks. Qiao > Here are a few photos that I consider sharp and do a good job of > demonstrating a lens' capabilities (full image first, then a 100% crop). > The crops are big files, your browser might want to scale them down to fit > the window. These also show why I prefer the DMR @ ISO 400 over Provia > 400F: > > 560mm f/6.8 @f/6.8 (a 1970 design) on the R8/DMR: > http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/phasianidae/witu19.jpg > http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/phasianidae/witu19crop.jpg > > http://wildlightphoto.com/mammals/artiodactyls/dash01.jpg > http://wildlightphoto.com/mammals/artiodactyls/dash01crop.jpg > > 80-200mm Vario-Elmar @ 180mm & full aperture on Provia 400F: > http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/strigidae/eeow02.jpg > http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/strigidae/eeow02crop.jpg > > The 70-200L may be as remarkable a lens as some have said, but these > photos don't show it. Or I might be spoiled by the DMR and Leica lenses. > > > > Doug Herr > Birdman of Sacramento > http://www.wildlightphoto.com