Camaro5 Posted August 30, 2020 Share #1 Posted August 30, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Assuming the same lens & film was used, would there be any difference in the image quality from one R body to another? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 30, 2020 Posted August 30, 2020 Hi Camaro5, Take a look here Do all R bodies have the same image quality?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Reini Posted August 30, 2020 Share #2 Posted August 30, 2020 For sure. There are many important components between the rear lens and the film plane. Sorry...😁 If the times are correct and equally correct for everyone, the results should be the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted August 30, 2020 Share #3 Posted August 30, 2020 The result will be exactly the same, a camera does nothing but facilitate you a way to let the lens project something on the film for a brief period of time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted August 30, 2020 Share #4 Posted August 30, 2020 Provided that the exposures are the same. This presupposes that the indicated shutter speeds are accurate and the same if the lens apertures are the same. If you let different R cameras do their own thing with regard to metering and exposure control, then things may not be the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted August 30, 2020 Share #5 Posted August 30, 2020 And finally, assuming all cameras were properly adjusted to spec...pressure plates, lens mountings properly tightened and plane, etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camaro5 Posted August 31, 2020 Author Share #6 Posted August 31, 2020 Thanks. I was just wondering if there was anything different in the various models besides features. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted August 31, 2020 Share #7 Posted August 31, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good question, the Leicaflex SL and the R8/9 Slightly better at lower speeds then the other models. However the M7 did better then the R models at lower speeds around 60 to lower otherwise my R models would crap over the M's. Thats my opinion as I have both. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted August 31, 2020 Share #8 Posted August 31, 2020 Disregarding camera stability (hand-held motion and shutter vibration issues, both of which are pretty easily solved by using a tripod and, on the SLRs, releasing the mirror prior to making an exposure for some kinds of camera/lens/exposure time combinations), the only bottom line that could cause a difference in the image formed on a piece of film is how well the camera's interior manages light reflections behind the lens. The different SLR models might show some differences in this regard ... But Leica has always done a very good job in this respect such that even the poorest of them are unlikely to show more than a barely measurable difference from the best, and certainly not a significantly perceptual one. G Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted August 31, 2020 Share #9 Posted August 31, 2020 vor 19 Stunden schrieb Camaro5: Assuming the same lens & film was used, would there be any difference in the image quality from one R body to another? No. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Morgan Posted August 31, 2020 Share #10 Posted August 31, 2020 It depends. I have always found the R8 and the Leicaflex SL2 to produce a greater number of sharp photos - or if you like, with fewest failures. The mass of the cameras and the mirror dampening seems to be much better at suppressing shake, and in the case of the SL2, the viewing screen is so sharp that I have not missed focus more than once with my 1.4 Summilux (my hit rate with my Nikkor 50mm f1.4 is 20 times worse). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fernando_b Posted September 1, 2020 Share #11 Posted September 1, 2020 ... and it may depend upon the shutter curtain slides horizontally or vertically (VERY thin differences, almost undetectable). For what I know in all the R body the curtain slides vertically... Fernando. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fernando_b Posted September 1, 2020 Share #12 Posted September 1, 2020 ... also the velocity of the curtains: with low velocity and short times (below 1/1000") there are diffraction effects... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canonier Posted September 3, 2020 Share #13 Posted September 3, 2020 The image quality is defined by the lens, not by the camera body. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camaro5 Posted September 4, 2020 Author Share #14 Posted September 4, 2020 On 9/3/2020 at 8:27 AM, Canonier said: The image quality is defined by the lens, not by the camera body. Yes, and in my original post the question was if the same lens & film was used. And speaking of lenses, I went on a trip recently to Jackson Hole, WY and shot a couple of rolls of Ilford HP5+ 400 using a Vario-Elmar 3.5/35-70. It came with the R4s Mod. 2 I picked up and I didn't have time to get anything different. I also had my medium format digital camera with me and also wanted to shoot some 35mm B&W. Well, the film came out with more grain than I'm used to, and generally they were okay, but I kind of expected more. I've since sold the Vario-Elmar and picked up a 2.8/24mm Elmarit-R & a 2/50mm Summicron-R. Hoping to get some better results with these lenses & different film. I have a roll of Velvia 100 slide film in there now and also have some Tmax 100 for some B&W shots on the next trip to Zion in Utah. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canonier Posted September 5, 2020 Share #15 Posted September 5, 2020 You're mixing things up. of course a medium format digital camera will produce less grainy pics than an analogue camera loaded with HP5, a film that is not known for its fine grain. A different lens will not help you there. TMax however, will do so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camaro5 Posted September 5, 2020 Author Share #16 Posted September 5, 2020 3 hours ago, Canonier said: You're mixing things up. of course a medium format digital camera will produce less grainy pics than an analogue camera loaded with HP5, a film that is not known for its fine grain. A different lens will not help you there. TMax however, will do so. No, I'm not mixing anything up. You are not reading what I'm saying correctly. Of course a medium format digital will have less grain, but that wasn't the point. I didn't care for the grain in HP5 compared to other films I've used, like Tmax, in different cameras. As for the lenses, I much prefer primes over zooms and would expect to get better results from them. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canonier Posted September 5, 2020 Share #17 Posted September 5, 2020 So, where's your point now? Initially you wanted to know whether different camera bodies would produce different images given the same lens and film. That has been clearly answered. Then you told your story of the HP5 and the digital medium format camera etc. I am getting confused here: what are you getting at now? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camaro5 Posted September 5, 2020 Author Share #18 Posted September 5, 2020 Something must be getting lost in the translation. No need to go any further with this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreamplace Posted September 5, 2020 Share #19 Posted September 5, 2020 (edited) "Well, the film came out with more grain than I'm used to, and generally they were okay, but I kind of expected more. " This raises some questions with me.... What is it that you are used to? What film are you referring to? How did you develop the film, i.e. what developer did you use, what time, what kind of agitation? Do you scan or print in the darkroom? HP5 is a grainy film, like Tri-X. Grain is an essential element in analog photography, so when using a film like HP5 I would assume that you intend to get strong grain and make this part of the image you create. Different lenses will not make any difference as far as grain is concerned but may give a difference in image quality (details and contrast), mainly at full or large openings, mainly at the edges and corners. I have no experience with the Vario-Elmar but of course, like any zoom lens, it will not give the image quality that you'll get from the prime lenses you bought, so that was a good thing to do. Do you shoot portraits? If so, add a 90mm lens (Summicron 2 or Elmarit 2.8) and you have a superb set of lenses for a wide range of use! The Tmax 100 you mentioned will give very different results: much less grain, much more detail. Best developers for this film are Kodak Xtol and Tmax. Shoot it at box speed and develop it according to Kodak instructions and you can get great results. Good luck and have fun! Edited September 5, 2020 by Dreamplace Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camaro5 Posted September 6, 2020 Author Share #20 Posted September 6, 2020 My prior analog work was all on a Hasselblad 503CX medium format camera. I've used various speeds of Tmax, Ektar, and some Fuji 120 roll films which did not exhibit the same level of grain that HP5+ had. The HP5+ just had more grain than I liked. Looking back, I should have used a film I was more familiar with for this particular shoot. I don't develop film myself; it gets sent to a lab on the west coast for developing & high-res scanning. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.