G
Guest
Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)
In message <h006i119d6u0usqr2gipta896pkg9ln5vp@4ax.com>,
Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>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?
--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
In message <h006i119d6u0usqr2gipta896pkg9ln5vp@4ax.com>,
Rich <none@none.com> wrote:
>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?
--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><