Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No, i am 50 Years old and need no coolnessfactor anymore 😉

Did you ever shot from groundlevel with that camera?  You have  to lie flat on the ground to have a good view...
So i would better look a bit girly then getting wet when lying flat in the mud…

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

Did you ever shot from groundlevel with that camera?  You have  to lie flat on the ground to have a good view...
So i would better look a bit girly then getting wet when lying flat in the mud…

Oh, just hike up your skirt.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

48 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

No, i am 50 Years old and need no coolnessfactor anymore 😉

Did you ever shot from groundlevel with that camera?  You have  to lie flat on the ground to have a good view...
So i would better look a bit girly then getting wet when lying flat in the mud…

Mate, use the fotos app for that

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at DPReview's Q2 sample gallery I was struck by one of the ISO 2000 images, converted into a JPEG both internally by the camera and via ACR.

Here's the link for the JPEG processed in camera - link

And here's the link for the JPEG processed in Adobe Camera Raw 11 using the Adobe Standard profile - link

I downloaded the RAW file and I think the DPReview ACR processing was, shall we say, unsympathetic (sorry, can't share due to copyright) but I'm still seeing more noise than I'd like in an ISO 2000 image. Am I missing something?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RAW conversion is always a trade-off between Noise and Sharpness.

Any comments about one converter relative to another need to be aware of this and take it into account.

This was brought home in the early days of Leica digital when the M8 was released.  There were many advocates for Converter A versus Converter B etc and vice versa.

What nobody managed to find was one that produced images with lower noise that was also sharper.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pico said:

Some subjects gain accutance with visible noise.

You are absolutely correct.  

What we are wandering into the mine field of "Sharpness" versus "Resolution" versus "Visual Perception".

I suspect that Noise is inversely correlated with Resolution for a given converter rather than Sharpness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On March 8, 2019 at 6:18 AM, verwackelt said:

Oh no,
in one Hand the Leica, in the other hand a smartphone?
THAT looks really girly 😂
 

…and its impractical too.

You could simply add the phone or xpad on top of the camera (at an angle to see better). No need for acrobatics.  :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You call that simply?
i call simply just to flip out the tiltable screen and leave the distracting smartphone at home when i am out for photography 😉
And i do really not care that i may look a little bit girly whilst doing this…  :P 
My bristly legs seen beneath my hiked skirt may compensate this…

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, verwackelt said:

You call that simply?
i call simply just to flip out the tiltable screen and leave the distracting smartphone at home when i am out for photography 😉
And i do really not care that i may look a little bit girly whilst doing this…  :P 
My bristly legs seen beneath my hiked skirt may compensate this…

 

Time for you to come out of the closet, get some makeup and a dress to deal with your girly needs.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...