 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2005Canon's flagship not so great?
You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1895,1855903,00.asp >You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1895,1855903,00.asp You can find a journalist to support just about any position. We are not told anything about the lenses used, etc, in comparing the 10MP Leica to the 17MP 1DsII. We don't know if Mancuso like aliasing; maybe the Leica has a weak AA filter?  Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >10MP Leica to the 17MP 1DsII. We don't know if Mancuso like aliasing; >maybe the Leica has a weak AA filter? Why don't you read Guy's full report in his thread on Fred Miranada's board. Guy is a working photographer not a journalist. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/0 Take a look at his pictures and the discussion about why he thinks the Lecia is better. He give all the details on lenses, etc here. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/0 A clue on lenses take a look at his gear list. ************************************************************** "There has always been war. War is raging throughout the world at the present moment. And there is little reason to believe that war will cease to exist in the future. As man has become increasingly civilized, his means of destroying his fellow man have become ever more efficient, cruel and devastating. Is it possible to put an end to a form of human behavior which has existed throughout history by means of photography? The proportions of that notion seem ridiculously out of balance. Yet, that very idea has motivated me. James Nachtwey War Photographer http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ >>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > A clue on lenses take a look at his gear list. Good lord, one wonders what he used to make the comparo, doesn't one. Some of the finest fixed focal length lenses known to man, Leica mount and 8 by count, and one lonely, if very good, Canon zoom. One wonders what the results would have been if he had compared the two cameras with, say, the Leica 50mm f2 summicron and the Canon 50mm f1.4, or the Leica 35mm f1.4 summilux and the Canon 35mm f1.4L. And you know the edge sharpness was going to be better on the Leica, since it has a 1.5 (?) crop factor vs. the full frame of the Canon. I couldn't find any reference to lenses used in the comparison... SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >full frame of the Canon. >I couldn't find any reference to lenses used in the comparison... Guy uses the Lecia lenses on his Canon. Same lenses on both bodies. ********************************************************* "I have been a witness, and these pictures are my testimony. The events I have recorded should not be forgotten and must not be repeated." -James Nachtwey- http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ >>>>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Guy uses the Lecia lenses on his Canon. Same lenses on both bodies. Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... >But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... Stovall is replying based on his own personal research into Guy - I was replying to Rich and his swift belief in journalism that supports his viewpoints. I.E., his lack of critical thinking. It would be nice if Stovall gave a link to the post where Guy said exactly what he liked better about the Leica, or gave samples. I don't have time to read entire threads of mostly straw to find the gold. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... >>But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > have time to read entire threads of mostly straw to find the gold. > ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< Critical thinking would spoil Rich's fun. If he actually thought before he wrote, he'd have nothing to write...(Take that any way you like!) SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... >>>But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Critical thinking would spoil Rich's fun. If he actually thought before he >wrote, he'd have nothing to write...(Take that any way you like!) Yes, that article should not have been done, or posted. Spoken like one of the typical Canon three monkeys. -Rich >>>>Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... >>>>But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > one of the typical Canon three monkeys. > -Rich Think what you like, Rich, what you do is so seldom is based on reality. I didn't say anything about the article, nor, really did you. You just hopped on a train you thought was going somewhere. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >Yes, that article should not have been done, or posted. Spoken like >one of the typical Canon three monkeys. If you thought that Guy Mancuso had something interesting to say, you could have linked to his post. Instead, you linked to someone who did a digested version of what Guy had to say. In any event, you have to see the guy's workflow and what it is he likes/dislikes to really evaluate his opinion. Does he view 100%? The higher MP camera using the same lens is always going to look softer. Does the Leica have more aliasing? Less aliasing? A RAW conversion or in-camera JPEG that is more like the film he used to use? Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... >>But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... > >Stovall is replying based on his own personal research into Guy - I was >replying to Rich and his swift belief in journalism that supports his >viewpoints. I.E., his lack of critical thinking. But good reading comprehension, unlike yourself. Notice the "?" at the end of the post's subject? I didn't say I believed the article one way or another. It's getting harder to post things without hurting the flower-delicate feelings of Canon supporters. -Rich >But good reading comprehension, unlike yourself. Notice the "?" at >the end of the post's subject? I didn't say I believed the article >one way or another. >It's getting harder to post things without hurting the flower-delicate >feelings of Canon supporters. This has nothing to do with Canon; it has to do with your style of posting. You are like our own National Enquirer. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>But good reading comprehension, unlike yourself. Notice the "?" at >>the end of the post's subject? I didn't say I believed the article [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >This has nothing to do with Canon; it has to do with your style of >posting. You are like our own National Enquirer. And like all intelligent people, it's up to you to determine if the post in-question has any merit. I only presented the article, with the question posed by it, maybe the Canon flagship isn't so terrific if a 10meg camera produces better images? I didn't say adamantly that the statement was true. I read things like, "The 1DMkII is a better camera than the 1DSMkII." You can simply avoid reading this kind of thing if in your mind it makes no sense and no tangible reasons can be provided to prove it. -Rich >>>>>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Thanks, didn't (and still don't) see where he said/says that... > But what I said about edge sharpness still stands... http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/6 -- Slack >>>>>>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > -- > Slack Thanks, but there's something weird going on there. The Leica 19mm on the Leica produces a warmer image than it does on the Canon in the first pairing. But the second pair of images, the Canon, is warmer than the Leica, maybe accounted for by the apparent overexposure. Just odd...he may have reversed the order, unintentionally, since the cooler image is apparently shot with a wider lens than the warmer one, in both cases. And at those sizes, it's hard to tell which is better than which. SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com On 9/10/05 10:50 AM, in article ihDUe.21263$sw6.13505@fed1read05, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > apparently shot with a wider lens than the warmer one, in both cases. > And at those sizes, it's hard to tell which is better than which. It looked to me like _both_ of the Canon shots as posted were overexposed! I suppose that Guy as a professional photographer knows what he is doing but it kind of looks like he _wanted_ the Leica shots to come out better. Chuck > It looked to me like _both_ of the Canon shots as posted were overexposed! I > suppose that Guy as a professional photographer knows what he is doing but > it kind of looks like he _wanted_ the Leica shots to come out better. > Chuck I don't know that _Guy_, but something I learned a long time ago from a sport I was involved in: Just because you're a Pro (even a really good one), this has zero impact on your knowledge of the equipment you use, or your ability to accurately communicate it to others. And everyone I knew back then, chose their equipment purely based on how much they had to pay for it.... preferably nothing. I know there /are/ exceptions, but they are the exception. -- Slack >>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>>http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1895,1855903,00.asp >>You can find a journalist to support just about any position. >>We are not told anything about the lenses used, etc, in comparing the >>10MP Leica to the 17MP 1DsII. We don't know if Mancuso like aliasing; >>maybe the Leica has a weak AA filter? >Why don't you read Guy's full report in his thread on Fred Miranada's >board. Guy is a working photographer not a journalist. I didn't say Guy was a journalist. I was replying to Rich, who implied that the journalism was fact. >http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/0 >Take a look at his pictures and the discussion about why he thinks the >Lecia is better. He give all the details on lenses, etc here. This is not what "Rich" linked to. The Leica has 16-bit RAW data, so that could account for the difference. What he says about CCD vs CMOS is probably out of date, though. Canon CMOS sensors have fairly low noise, and it is the bit-depth, not the noise levels, that limit dynamic range. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >10MP Leica to the 17MP 1DsII. We don't know if Mancuso like aliasing; >maybe the Leica has a weak AA filter? That is a point; How many Canon lenses can compare favorably to Leica lenses? -Rich >>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >That is a point; How many Canon lenses can compare favorably to Leica >lenses? Only about a half-dozen, perhaps. The 135mm f/1.2L, 300mm f2.8L IS, 400mm f/2.8L IS, and 500mm f/4L IS are probably the best. Canon's better end is its telephoto end. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< >>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > lenses? > -Rich More to the point, looking at his lens list, how can a Canon 24-70 f2.8L be expected to produce as good an image as one taken with whatever Leica fixed focal length lens he used? It's a good zoom, but come on... SignatureSkip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >>>>You'd never know it from the magazine reviews. >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >expected to produce as good an image as one taken with whatever Leica fixed >focal length lens he used? It's a good zoom, but come on... He uses his Lecia lenses on the Canon.... ********************************************************* "I have been a witness, and these pictures are my testimony. The events I have recorded should not be forgotten and must not be repeated." -James Nachtwey- http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.