Findus Posted September 23, 2006 Share #1 Posted September 23, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm sure quit a lot of you saw and read the M8 review in the latest LFI. Although magazine pictures cannot be used judging the characteristics of a camerra or lens I was still quite disapointed by the fact that the images didn't have the nice OOF touch the film M's have, furthermore they look like digital shots (but then what to expect form a digital camera) On the whole I was dissapointed. Maybe it is the photogs way of shooting, I certainly hope so.... What are you're thoughts about this ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 23, 2006 Posted September 23, 2006 Hi Findus, Take a look here M8 in latest LFI issue. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
albertwang Posted September 23, 2006 Share #2 Posted September 23, 2006 Can you give a more concrete explanation of what you meant? Scan the mag photos up and explain in detail what the OOF in digital not having the characteristics of say a MP/M7 shot... It's hard to understand what you meant... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP3 Posted September 23, 2006 Share #3 Posted September 23, 2006 I'm sure quit a lot of you saw and read the M8 review in the latest LFI.Although magazine pictures cannot be used judging the characteristics of a camerra or lens I was still quite disapointed by the fact that the images didn't have the nice OOF touch the film M's have, furthermore they look like digital shots (but then what to expect form a digital camera) On the whole I was dissapointed. Maybe it is the photogs way of shooting, I certainly hope so.... What are you're thoughts about this ? Hi Findus Are those pictures the same as those shown on the M8 brochure or the British Journal of Photography, i.s. the portfolio shot by Simon Wheatley? Or is it a new set of images released taken by M8? Best Matthew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 23, 2006 Share #4 Posted September 23, 2006 furthermore they look like digital shots (but then what to expect form a digital camera) On the whole I was dissapointed. If you want your shots to look like film, use film. Or convert your digital shot using one of the many plugins designed to give them the look of film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smep Posted September 23, 2006 Share #5 Posted September 23, 2006 ...furthermore they look like digital shots (but then what to expect form a digital camera)... Why should pictures of a digital Leica look different than pictures of any other digicam??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 23, 2006 Share #6 Posted September 23, 2006 If you want your shots to look like film, use film. Or convert your digital shot using one of the many plugins designed to give them the look of film. For instance, Alien Skin's "Exposure": http://www.alienskin.com/exposure/index.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Findus Posted September 23, 2006 Author Share #7 Posted September 23, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why should pictures of a digital Leica look different than pictures of any other digicam??? 4000$ worth of camera... excluding lens! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 23, 2006 Share #8 Posted September 23, 2006 Did you check the price of other pro cameras recently? The Nikon D2Xs for instance, or the Canon Eos1DsII? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.