markkers Posted April 13, 2011 Share #21 Posted April 13, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) In those old 'analog'-days, when I had an R3, I also had my own lab to do prints. First BW, later also colour. You used to do a lot of things there. In BW, while doing prints from a negative, you partially covered parts (moving a sheet of cardboard to and fro above the affected area) which were overexposed in order to give the other normally exposed parts some more light. On my 'Durst'-system, I had wheels to manually adjust filters for the different colours, adjusting them to give the best results. Basically, that was the mechanical equivalent of what we do digitally nowadays. Although sometimes a bit nostalgic, I don't want to go back to those days. The chemicals, special lights, stains on the clothes, etc... trouble with the spouse when you watered prints in the bathtub... nowadays it's much easier. What I want to say is, that there is rarely a photo that looks good without PP. It wasn't in the analog days and it isn't in our current digital phase. Even if you don't do anything and just use 'standard' settings, these still are settings that are applied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Hi markkers, Take a look here D-Lux 5 a real Leica? Yes of course, but.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jjonsalt Posted April 13, 2011 Share #22 Posted April 13, 2011 so I am never afraid...... maybe I am old school.I went to a college that has the biggest Photography degree course in the Southern hemisphere, I didn't imply you were afraid...read it as "seems so". Old school? My avatar shows me in '56 at the age of 9 with my TLR. I was also making contact prints at that time. B&W? My highest awards are for monochrome prints. BTW, if I may ask, at which college did you get your degree in photography? I have even waited for the right time of year to take a photo I was after. Still, it needed PP to tell what "I" saw, the mood "I" wanted to project. Since filters that used to be used for B&W film photos are useless with digital, how do you separate reds, greens etc with digital? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cernobila Posted April 13, 2011 Share #23 Posted April 13, 2011 I didn't imply you were afraid...read it as "seems so". Old school? My avatar shows me in '56 at the age of 9 with my TLR. I was also making contact prints at that time. B&W? My highest awards are for monochrome prints. BTW, if I may ask, at which college did you get your degree in photography? I have even waited for the right time of year to take a photo I was after. Still, it needed PP to tell what "I" saw, the mood "I" wanted to project. Since filters that used to be used for B&W film photos are useless with digital, how do you separate reds, greens etc with digital? College I was talking about was RMIT (Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology) ......I do not PP. Sorry I lie, sometimes I lighten or darken a little and sometimes I crop slightly to improve composition........I never used filters in the darkroom outside of college (I had to use them as part of the course) ........I do not separate colours, I only shoot in JPEG on standard setting and allow any imperfections to remain, keeping the authenticity of the moment. But I digress; we should get back on track discussing the "title" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted April 13, 2011 Share #24 Posted April 13, 2011 ...... Handling could be better. It's fast, but buttons are tiny (something I find common to just about all digital products). I just leave it on P. Too fiddly to squint into an LCD and try to select shutter or aperture. ........ David, in general I agree with your overall assessment. However I dislike standardizing on 'P' mode. I persevered and set my aperture to f/2.8 in 'A' mode which gives me a very useful alternative mode for many of my subjects. I agree that 'M' requires smaller finger tips than mine, but the camera has become my carry-anywhere camera for personal and family use. It is quite capable of producing journalistic illustrations of the highest order. It is the first in the D-Lux series that I have owned. The zoom range in earlier models did not appeal. 28-90mm is a good specification and the Leica lens is superb. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted April 13, 2011 Share #25 Posted April 13, 2011 ... 28-90mm is a good specification and the Leica lens is superb. 24-90mm is even better. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.