Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/13

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

Subject: [Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?
From: richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:09:45 -0700
References: <380-22009841320551846@M2W037.mail2web.com>

Well, remember Michael Reichmann's oft-misquoted summary that "the D30
(the original Canon 6 Megapixer) is as good as medium format film."

Most people will choose digital pics, even from a low end P&S to film.
Many studies have shown that.

I don't think it's about what your customers prefer to see, but what
you prefer to use.

Simple as that.

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 1:55 PM,
wildlightphoto at earthlink.net<wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Now, my specified conditions: Comparing 11" x 14" lightjet prints made from
> Provia 400 scanned at 4000 dpi with 11" x 14" lightjet prints made from ISO
> 400 DMR files (same lens for all photos), the gallery owner I met with this
> week did not conclude that the film-origin prints were sharper. ?He had no
> idea what camera, lens or technology I used on any of the photos so he had
> no vested interest in either technology. ?He singled out the DMR prints and
> commented on the 'remarkable detail and color quality', and he asked what
> camera I was using. ?The prints he chose for the gallery were all from the
> DMR. ?YMMV.
>



-- 
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
http://rfman.wordpress.com
// book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963


Replies: Reply from frank.dernie at btinternet.com (FRANK DERNIE) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (wildlightphoto at earthlink.net) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)