Photoskeptic Posted April 27, 2007 Share #1 Posted April 27, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) First one is M8, DNG conversion, ISO 160, f11 Second is M3, Fuji Acros 100, f11 Both images shot with 50 tabbed Summicron. The jpeg quality does no justice to the film shot, but unfortunately there is no choice. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/22659-bw-comparison-m8-vs-m3/?do=findComment&comment=240326'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 27, 2007 Posted April 27, 2007 Hi Photoskeptic, Take a look here BW Comparison: M8 vs M3. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wilfredo Posted April 27, 2007 Share #2 Posted April 27, 2007 The tonal range is better in the first shot. Cheers, Wilfredo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted April 27, 2007 Share #3 Posted April 27, 2007 Are you sure, Wilfredo? ... the first one seems to have more blown out areas in the white sands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted April 27, 2007 Share #4 Posted April 27, 2007 These shots look very similar when reduced to this size. The first one is a tad more contrasty, but to tell anything at all, the size needs to be *much* larger, or even better, prints need to be viewed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted April 28, 2007 Share #5 Posted April 28, 2007 Another confirmation to a sentiment of mine: when comparing Digi to Film, look AT THE PRINTS : jpeg cannot give any real matter of judgment. Aprt this principle: film image is simply by sure, a little darker: did you shoot with the same shutter time ? M8 is 160 vs. 100 the film... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted April 28, 2007 Author Share #6 Posted April 28, 2007 I think we all know the limitations of jpegs. I posted this because I was curious myself and I hoped to demonstrate that either setup will deliver good bw. Yes, the scene is very contrasty and perhaps an indoor comparison or street shooting scene would be better. I'll see what I can do. Shutter speed was 1/250 on both cameras. Thanks for your comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sirvine Posted April 28, 2007 Share #7 Posted April 28, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Problems with the M8 file (contrast, highlights) are probably easily remedied in Lightroom--development being the massive, insurmountable variable in any comparison like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted April 28, 2007 Share #8 Posted April 28, 2007 In BW, I think that going to digital is really a win, when one finds the right combo printer/ink/paper : lot of people really were smart, and loved, to work with chemicals in darkroom... but, honestly, IT based "darkroom" is another life.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted April 28, 2007 Share #9 Posted April 28, 2007 First one is M8, DNG conversion, ISO 160, f11Second is M3, Fuji Acros 100, f11 Both images shot with 50 tabbed Summicron. The jpeg quality does no justice to the film shot, but unfortunately there is no choice. I am sorry, but which one is the «first one», and which is «second»? With my eyes scanning naturally from top to bottom (like most everybody, I guess), I assume «first one» is the top one, yet the bottom one has the tighter crop, calling to mind to the 1,3 factor of the M8 (75 mm with a 50 as opposed to 50 on the M3.) IF they were shot from the same spot. Am I missing something here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Sanchez Posted April 28, 2007 Share #10 Posted April 28, 2007 The EXIF data shows Minolta on the second pic. Is that your scanner embedding Minolta in the file? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted April 29, 2007 Author Share #11 Posted April 29, 2007 Yes. I suppose it would be nice if my M3 produced EXIF data:) The scanned image was cropped. I am assuming the scanner holder had something to do with the edges being darker, similar to vignetting but just on the edges not corners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted April 29, 2007 Share #12 Posted April 29, 2007 the second picture looks very strange.. ...the summicron never had this vignetation.... regards, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted April 29, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted April 29, 2007 Jan, see my above comment. For some reason this roll of Acros came back from the lab extremely curly. I probably should have placed the negs between two very heavy books for a week before scanning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.