Hi Doug! You (in response to Elliot) wrote: >Compared with film, the DMR shines at higher ISO like 400 or greater. >I've had a lot of high-ISO conditions lately so that's why I've been >using the DMR so much. It's not as good as film in the SL or SL2 where >the viewfinder quality is an issue, for example where focus has to be >quick and precise within a mm or so of 'perfect'. For me the R8 is >digital-only because the SL or SL2 in most cases is the better film >camera. I concur... the SL has an amazing finder and is wonderful for film use. I find the R8 to be an extremely useful camera for film use, however, as the finder is "almost" as good as the SL/SL2 and it has the advantage of aperture priority. This means I can fiddle with the aperture to get the DOF I want, and let the camera do the rest, enabling me to concentrate on the subject and composition. > Another situation where the R8/DMR out-performs film is with >extremely active subjects like warblers or kinglets where a high >percentage of rejects is the norm. Yup! I use the R8/DMR at ISO 400 w/2 stops underexposure (=ISO1600) whenever I have the Telyt 400 or Telyt + 2x on the camera. It allows high enough shutter speeds to keep quick birds and camera shake in check! >Unlike David, I've been having problems with moire in many of my bird >photos, particularly where the lens can resolve the finest feather >detail. It's visible in several of the photos I've posted if you know >what to look for, and a few photos I've made have so much moire that I >haven't posted them. David, what do you use to eliminate moire? I would think that the reasons I have fewer problems are two... [1] the Telyt is not capable of resolving as the 280 APO does... so moire problems don't occur as often; and [2] I am, perhaps, not as critical you are.... even if I should be! When I do have moire problems, the Geometric NR function in the paid version of Silkypix works quite well to get rid of it. >The DMR's output is surprisingly easy to work with, moire aside. I'm >using FlexColor to process the raw files and I find that most often the >files have to be tweaked only slightly to get optimum picture quality. I've not used FlexColor... it did not seem intuitive to me. I've been using FastStone Image Viewer (windoze only) to preview and edit out the duds. Then I convert with Silkypix, which gives me visibly better results than PS-CS2, and do any final tweaking, addition of copyright notices and resizing in PS. A bit more convoluted, perhaps, but quite quick once you're used to the flow, and with very good results. As you mention, Doug. Most shots need little other than the exposure compensation (when using the 2 stops under trick) to look really good! BTW, Doug... I've been busy with nieces, nephews, and assorted grandkids these last few days, and this has left little time for email. But it's been a heck of a lot of fun! (Life returns to "normal" on July 12th.) However, I would be remiss if I did not comment on your Alaskan shots shown so far. They are, as always, the work of a master... with, perhaps, the exception of the Grizzly shot. Still, it's not often one gets a griz at close range! I look forward to seeing more! Cheers! --- David Young, Logan Lake, CANADA Personal Web-site at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt Limited Edition Prints at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/prints.htm Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm Archives are at: //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/