My editorial venue changed, after I was able to get a hold of the 40mm
S/A. I've used the 50mm Distagon, prior to that, along with the 60m
Distagon.
I find myself using the 60mm literally all the time, along with the
80mm. Even the 150mm sits in the case unused for the most part.
A 36x36 sensor at 22mgs, or more as time will tell, can make a very
respectable image.
The capability of the new sensors with shadow areas has made flash fill
almost un-necessary. Which means even my SL66, with a universal back
can have a new lease on life.
S. Dimitrov
On Feb 12, 2005, at 6:03 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
Hi all,
I can't comment on the 20D, as I decided to go Nikon digital a while back.From: Slobodan Dimitrov <s.dimitrov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
The 20D is basically a junker body. It's a stop gap camera, at best. It's for those who need something right now, but who are willing to wait for further product development. I personally don't think that I will get a DM-R.
, I much preferred Lumix (Panasonic/Leica ZLR w/12x zoom) considering its
ergonomics and features. The Lumix is very well thought out and executed,
and one can actually use the manual focus feature, which makes focus
confirmation less of an issue. However, as it was only a 4 mpixel camera,
it would not have been sufficient for my needs. The use of my existing R
glass cobbled onto a digital body is not so much of an issue as the other
matters associated with digital sensors, such as dust problems. For some
reason, only Olympus appears to address this problem at this point in
time.
I suppose that the viability of the current digital backs depends onI'm on 'tactical' alert for a back for my Rollei, which is a more viable alternative for me.
whether you're a "tele-type" or "wide-type" user, and I'm definitely a
"wide-type". I notice that you have your 40mm SA on the market. As this is
one of my favorite lenses for use with my 6008i, I would not want to lose
its perspective by going with a 36x36 or smaller sensor size. In a similar
vein, I would only consider a full-size 35 mm sensor for use with my Leica
glass.
From: Bob Palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
I agree that the color-fringing-at-the-edges issue is of keen interest to the film-lenses-on-digicams set, and that your experience reveals valuable info. It just seems to me that the difference is probably more an attribute of these specific lenses and lens types than a "tribute to Leica glass." I'm certainly a fan of said Leica Glass and I'm sure there will be plenty of other opportunities for revealing comparisons of this sort.
Color fringing could be a problem with using Bayer pattern sensors with any lenses designed for film. I'd expect this artifact to be more pronounced with wider lenses. I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that addressing this is one factor behind the delay of the DM-R.
From: Charles Cason <cec@xxxxxxx>[...]If you wish to have focus and exposure assistance, you may want to
The other concern is my age. I can still focus with a bright screen
but I need a lot of automation in other areas. It gets harder for me to
remember all the rules of good exposure as I get older.
Any and all serious discussion would be greatly appreciated.
consider a digital camera with an electronic viewfinder (EVF). Brightness
will not be an issue, though EVFs can take some time before one is
comfortable with them. Exposure should be less of an issue, but I have to
say that Nikon has taken this function to the level absurdity. I
absolutely hate the manual exposure functions on my Nikon, but,
fortunately it does a decent job in auto modes.
[...]From: Alex Hurst <corkflor@xxxxxx>
Serious observations on the transition between film and digital.
When I came back from Barcelona with six rolls under my belt (a lot for us amateurs), I decided that I'd dispense with the prints. Just get the negs developed and a standard hi-res, lo-res CD made from the negs.
I agree that this is a very practical workflow. The amount of time spent
So my point is that the direct digital route may suit a lot of people, but the film/CD route is a very close second apart from the waiting time - it can be all of an hour once you've delivered the film to the processors, but you don't know what you've got until the film's developed.
behind a computer sorting through the digital images is not a minor matter
to me. However, if your film processor offers it, why not get a "contact
sheet"? The processor that I use provides one at no extra cost along with
prints, but I'm not sure whether they do the same with discs, as I've not
used that service from them. I just scan the shots that I find "worthy".
;-)
Regards to all,
Neil Gould -------------------------------------- Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com Technical Graphics & Media
------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm Archives are at: www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Slobodan Dimitrov Photography
------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm Archives are at: www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
