Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tina, I was talking about prints, of which I see plenty. Its also that we are not averse to spending small fortunes on Leica lenses, but stick to middling zooms on SLRs, and then compare the two. Rangefinders have natural advantages for low light shooting in your style, and for you, they should be the design of choice. The Canon SLRs will exhibit more shake than the M8 will. I shoot a lot of wildlife, and for that the M8 is useless. Cheers Jayanand On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Tina Manley <images@comporium.net> wrote: > At 10:41 PM 9/25/2008, you wrote: > >> Tina, >> Both are tools, and each has its place for convenience and usefulness. I >> doubt that anyone can make out the difference between the cameras in a >> print >> or published photo, though. >> Cheers >> Jayanand >> > > Oh, but they can. My photos submitted to stock agencies using the Canons > have failed for "soft and lacking definition" and for "chromatic > aberrations". I've never had a Leica photo fail when submitted. After the > first few failed using the Canons, I was very particular to examine each > one > at 100% and could definitely see why they had failed. It's possible that > you couldn't see the difference in a 1/2 page published photo, but if the > photos can't pass quality control, they are useless to me anyway! > > > Tina > > Tina Manley > www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >