pascal_meheut Posted September 16, 2006 Share #1 Posted September 16, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) If the link has already been post, excuse me. Testreports I'll let each and everyone of you forge its own opinion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 16, 2006 Posted September 16, 2006 Hi pascal_meheut, Take a look here Erwin Puts review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted September 16, 2006 Share #2 Posted September 16, 2006 I was going to post it myself but you beat me to it. The Canon shots look sharper don't they. But was he shooting RAW or Jpeg? If Jpeg what was the in-camera sharpening? Not to forget this is all with pre-release firmware in the M8 so who knows what the noise situation will be in the released version? A sloppy review IMHO - at least where the comparative shots are concerned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 16, 2006 Share #3 Posted September 16, 2006 I wouldn't put too much stock into this... Erwin has been bought out by the Cannonnauts... Don't worry, perhaps Erwin needs his own disclaimer now eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 16, 2006 Share #4 Posted September 16, 2006 Simply put : It made my day. LOL And more reason to buy a M8:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 16, 2006 Share #5 Posted September 16, 2006 Is Erwin now working for Cannon eh? Again, shooting jpegs arghhhh!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uulrich Posted September 16, 2006 Share #6 Posted September 16, 2006 Erwin is a nice chap, his books and articles are a good source if you need technical input at a glance. As far as this report is concerned:- IMO the typical pseudo scientific stuff, w/ loads of personal opinions and non-objective wordings, lack of neutral puttings. Conclusion made for an audience who is not capable to draw its own. Sorry, Erwin. Had to be said. ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted September 16, 2006 Share #7 Posted September 16, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why is Erwin posting pix on a camera that's not finished in the way of software? Phil over at DPReview says they were specifically told not to post pix yet, not until there is a finalized software/firmware version in the production cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted September 16, 2006 Share #8 Posted September 16, 2006 Is Erwin now working for Cannon eh? Again, shooting jpegs arghhhh!!!! JPGS and downrezzing for the Internet,then saying blah blah blah, it's just not as good as a Cannon (fill in the blank) is not good. Also, the firmware isn't done yet. I don't know what Erwin's issues are, decided late in life that he had to switch to DSLRs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 16, 2006 Share #9 Posted September 16, 2006 Why is Erwin posting pix on a camera that's not finished in the way of software? I haven't a clue. I can only think that he wanted to be first off the block with some images. I've always found Erwin excellent when he's discussing lenses, but he seems out of his depth here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 16, 2006 Share #10 Posted September 16, 2006 Why is Erwin posting pix on a camera that's not finished in the way of software? Phil over at DPReview says they were specifically told not to post pix yet, not until there is a finalized software/firmware version in the production cameras. That's correct. Leica has asked all of us not to publish on file quality until we can test cameras with production level firmware. And I think that's quite reasonable, in fact. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 16, 2006 Share #11 Posted September 16, 2006 Looks like the Dutchman has seen better days... Again, nothing is final, but basically a big grain of salt needs to be taken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 16, 2006 Share #12 Posted September 16, 2006 That's correct. Leica has asked all of us not to publish on file quality until we can test cameras with production level firmware. And I think that's quite reasonable, in fact. I had a play with a pre-release DMR and was asked not to post any images. As you say this seems perfectly reasonable given that the last thing Leica want is for flaws in the pre-release software being interpreted as flaws in the camera itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 16, 2006 Share #13 Posted September 16, 2006 There's a story behind this for sure but I don't what it is yet. I honor my agreements so I can't talk about where I think Erwin is wrong about the M8 but I will say that my own conclusions (having worked with two different examples of the camera) are not the same as his. This is not the first time he and I have come to very different conclusions about digital cameras. I love the Olympus E-1 but he's made claims for it's abilities that just don't mesh with my experience. I respect Erwin's technical knowledge about lenses and sometimes quoted him, in fact, when I was writing for LL. But we disagreed on his analysis of the R-D1 and it looks like we're going to disagree on the M8. I will publish on file quality as soon as I'm allowed to. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted September 16, 2006 Share #14 Posted September 16, 2006 I dunno... Over at DPreview (and I suspect other places) the DSLR trolling, "rangefinders are obsolete", "it doesn't have autofocus", "it's too expensive", has has been extensive. I don't know why, because the Cannonites need Zeiss and Leica to provide good glass for their computers. I suspect there is some serious insecurity going on, but since leica will never have any comparable market share to Cannon or Nikon I don't understand why... Now Erwin feels obligated to post his (rather ugly) pix before anyone else does, and those pix directly compared to a ffs Canon? I don't get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 16, 2006 Author Share #15 Posted September 16, 2006 Yes, Steve. I played with a pre-release DMR and posted images: people found them soft. But only because I did not sharpened them enough. Once I did, people found them extra sharp, quite impressive. One has to be very careful with such comparisons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 16, 2006 Share #16 Posted September 16, 2006 I agree with Sean he does a nice job on the lens reviews and the are pretty accurate according to what i have seen using them myself. Now on the other end of the yardstick . i completely disagree with him on anything digital and he proved that with the DMR . I have been shooting digital since the beginning and own the DMR today . that is no fluke The M8 is from all sources like the DMR in image quality. that i take to the bank or should i say withdrawl from to get one. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted September 16, 2006 Share #17 Posted September 16, 2006 Actually, my impression was that while he was digging to say good things about the Canon, his heart still belongs to Leica. As far as the image tests go, both cameras (and the Nikon D2x and the Canon 1DsII as well) produce great photographs; if anybody thought the Leica would be a startling improvement over the Canons or Nikons in image quality, he was being unrealistic. On the other hand, I expected the Leica to be as good as the others...and even Puts' tests suggest that is largely true. Now we can spend the rest of the year arguing about whether Canon images look plastic, Nikon doesn't allow shallow enough DOF, and Leica needs a filter. But the truth is, I suspect, better photographers' photographs will look better than lesser photographers', and the camera will be irrelevant. Off topic: Having looked at Puts' photographs over the years, has anyone else ever wondered where he gets his models? JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 16, 2006 Author Share #18 Posted September 16, 2006 Problem is, if you ask to DMR's owners why they choose it over Canon and Nikon, they answer quality of lenses wide-open, color brillance and so on. And what does he tests: resolution at f/8. Even on film, there is not such a difference between good lenses of major brands at f/8 on a sunny day: they are all quite good. So when he says a CCD cannot show that the Leica lenses are better, I suggest he tries the 75/2 wide open for instance. Here, the CCD will show how good this lens is, just like the DMR does with the 90/2 AA for instance as did the french magazine Chasseur d'Images: resolution at the top at f/2, no vignetting, no distorsion, no chromatic aberration, no other lens ever has ever been that good. But yes, at f/8 other lenses are in the same league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 16, 2006 Share #19 Posted September 16, 2006 Yes, wide open is the true test. .. the Cannon wide anglers wide open are small potatoes, buster! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 16, 2006 Share #20 Posted September 16, 2006 Never got soft images like the 'Leica wall' with my not-so-sharp R-D1 so far... The lack of AA filter may cause some moiré issues from time to time but that very lack should cause the pics to be way sharper IMHO. Doesn't look serious at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.