Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/11/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]$500 doesn't buy much of a power cord :). http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord/ Ken On 11/25/2015 1:22 PM, Bill Pearce wrote: > No you're missing out on the meaningless bullshit. It's like guys that > think their stereo sounds better with a $500 power cord from the amp > to the wall, but are clueless about the wires from the wall to the > breaker box to the street. It's like the monks arguing over the number > of angels on the head of a pin. I was just thinking, as I read the > business about Samsung exiting the camera business how things have > changed. I think that today you can get results from FF/APS/MFT that > are more than good enough for anyone. > > -----Original Message----- From: Dante Stella > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 12:48 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] XP-2 > > Does a 1/3 stop even make a difference? Or is 320 a lucky number that > people remember from TXP120? Serious question. > > I see references everywhere to rating 400 film of various types at > 320, and it seems a bit strange because few film cameras are accurate > and consistent enough to predict a blanket rule with an almost > insignificant amount of overexposure. Virtually anything with a leaf > shutter is already overexposing by at least that much -- meaning that > "320" really means 250, and 2/3 stop is much more noticeable than 1/3. > And with all mechanical shutters, each speed can have a different > error in a different direction. The other thing is that C-41 > processing, at least commercial processing, is not that consistent > either. > > And having put a densitometer to silver negatives exposed at one-third > stop increments with very accurate electronic shutters, it does not > tend to drag meaningful detail out of the toe. And it makes zero > difference to tones on a straight-line film like TMY. Maybe things are > different with XP2, but even eyeballing its curve, it seems doubtful > that (an actual) 1/3 stop would do very much. > > Or maybe I'm missing the magic here? I take the suggestion seriously > coming from you, but it still seems slightly superstitious. > > Best, > Dante > >> On Nov 25, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Overexposure lowers grain but also lowers contrast. I used 320 >> most. You >> can use the typical negative film approach -- expose for the shadows and >> let the highlights go where they may. It's hard to burn them out >> with that >> film. >> >> Paul >> www.PaulRoark.com >> >>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Bryk Oliver >>> <oliverbryk at comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> How should I rate XP-2 if none of the images will be printed? >>> >>> Thanks for any advice based on experience, >>> >>> Oliver >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information