Canon's flagship not so great?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
Rich <none@none.com> wrote:

>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?
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 

Rich

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2004
325
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:

>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>
>>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?

That is a point; How many Canon lenses can compare favorably to Leica
lenses?
-Rich
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:52e4i19stfao0pnb8cn3nekdls4cmk7pca@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>
>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>>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?
>
> That is a point; How many Canon lenses can compare favorably to Leica
> 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...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:

>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>
>>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.

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/
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>
>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>>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.
>
> 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.
>
>

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...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com>,
John A. Stovall <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:

>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:

>>>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.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <52e4i19stfao0pnb8cn3nekdls4cmk7pca@4ax.com>,
Rich <none@none.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>
>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>>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?
>
>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.


--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:55:02 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>
>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>
>>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>
>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...

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/
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bfd5i1pmkeraaph1rpi2keb6stnuufh34j@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:55:02 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>>
>>>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>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...
>
> 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...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 

Slack

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2005
136
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Skip M wrote:
> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:bfd5i1pmkeraaph1rpi2keb6stnuufh34j@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:55:02 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>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...
>>
>>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...
>
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/6
--
Slack
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Slack" <slacker7_ReMoVe_ThIs@scglobal.net> wrote in message
news:tuOdnZ8s_9JXa7_eRVn-vw@giganews.com...
> Skip M wrote:
>> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:bfd5i1pmkeraaph1rpi2keb6stnuufh34j@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:55:02 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>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.
>>>>>
>>>>>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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>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...
>>>
>>>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...
>>
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/6
> --
> 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.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 20:23:51 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>news:52e4i19stfao0pnb8cn3nekdls4cmk7pca@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>
>>>In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>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?
>>
>> That is a point; How many Canon lenses can compare favorably to Leica
>> 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...

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/
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <FCAUe.21241$sw6.19662@fed1read05>,
"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:

>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.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
news:jvm5i1dl5aibdirvq9g2k79sb80ugr880n@4ax.com...
> In message <FCAUe.21241$sw6.19662@fed1read05>,
> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>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.
> --
>
> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

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!)

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 

Rich

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2004
325
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 13:19:17 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:

>In message <FCAUe.21241$sw6.19662@fed1read05>,
>"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>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
 

Rich

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2004
325
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 06:30:29 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

><JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
>news:jvm5i1dl5aibdirvq9g2k79sb80ugr880n@4ax.com...
>> In message <FCAUe.21241$sw6.19662@fed1read05>,
>> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>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.
>> --
>>
>> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
>> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
>> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
>
>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
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:h006i119d6u0usqr2gipta896pkg9ln5vp@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 06:30:29 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>><JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
>>news:jvm5i1dl5aibdirvq9g2k79sb80ugr880n@4ax.com...
>>> In message <FCAUe.21241$sw6.19662@fed1read05>,
>>> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>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.
>>> --
>>>
>>> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
>>> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
>>> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
>>
>>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

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.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9/10/05 10:50 AM, in article ihDUe.21263$sw6.13505@fed1read05, "Skip M"
<shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:

> "Slack" <slacker7_ReMoVe_ThIs@scglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:tuOdnZ8s_9JXa7_eRVn-vw@giganews.com...
>> Skip M wrote:
>>> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:bfd5i1pmkeraaph1rpi2keb6stnuufh34j@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:55:02 -0700, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ke74i19ecr3tdl4msfuvie8u7ahu6feibc@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:00:38 GMT, JPS@no.komm wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <j214i119v9snoskb46td689uci6q0gka9n@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>> Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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...
>>>>
>>>> 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...
>>>
>> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/267995/6
>> --
>> 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.

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
 

Slack

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2005
136
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

C Wright wrote:

> 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
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
D Digital Cameras 2
E Digital Cameras 0
D Digital Cameras 0
H Digital Cameras 1
S Digital Cameras 1
1 Digital Cameras 1
R Digital Cameras 1
T Digital Cameras 1
G Digital Cameras 0
P Digital Cameras 1
G Digital Cameras 0
A Digital Cameras 3
B Digital Cameras 1
P Digital Cameras 1
F Digital Cameras 1
S Digital Cameras 5
S Digital Cameras 1
kalern123 Digital Cameras 3
jensenthemediocre Digital Cameras 1
L Digital Cameras 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY