$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
p.1 #2$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Desmolicious wrote:
Samsung AF Slim Zoom w Fojak 400
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54911633597_6e9c657a08_b.jpg
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54912510811_3e22a3c0f7_b.jpg
A better example would have been the van with the stickers. The M6 and FLE did a nice job but the Samsung would have provided a similar image. Unless you’re planning on magnifying it a thousand times and checking the corner's.
It’s good to see Daisy.
Nov 09, 2025 at 02:27 PM
p.1 #3$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Two totally different colours. Which is the real colour?
Nov 09, 2025 at 02:37 PM
p.1 #4$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
madNbad wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54911633597_6e9c657a08_b.jpg
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54912510811_3e22a3c0f7_b.jpgA better example would have been the van with the stickers. The M6 and FLE did a nice job but the Samsung would have provided a similar image. Unless you’re planning on magnifying it a thousand times and checking the corner's.
It’s good to see Daisy.
Let's be honest here. It's just an excuse for me to post pics of Daisy.
Desmolicious wrote
Samsung AF Slim Zoom w Fojak 400https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54911633597_6e9c657a08_b.jpg
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54912510811_3e22a3c0f7_b.jpg
It’s good to see Daisy.
Let's be honest here. It's just an excuse for me to post pics of Daisy.
Nov 09, 2025 at 02:41 PM
p.1 #5$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
chez wrote:
Two totally different colours. Which is the real colour?
Are you sure? How strange! I only used two different film stocks, different lenses, and the lighting was different in the pics.
One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Two totally different colours. Which is the real colour?
Are you sure? How strange! I only used two different film stocks, different lenses, and the lighting was different in the pics.
One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Nov 09, 2025 at 03:02 PM
p.1 #6$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Desmolicious wrote:
Are you sure? How strange! I only used two different film stocks, different lenses, and the lighting was different in the pics.
One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Sure the lighting was totally different…but which photo shows the real colour of the mutt. They are way different…more than what I’d expect due to the lighting. Your mutt is either brown or grey…not both.
chez wrote
Two totally different colours. Which is the real colour?One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Sure the lighting was totally different…but which photo shows the real colour of the mutt. They are way different…more than what I’d expect due to the lighting. Your mutt is either brown or grey…not both.
Nov 09, 2025 at 03:45 PM
p.1 #7$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Desmolicious wrote:
Samsung AF Slim Zoom w Fojak 400
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
"Who loves ya, baby [at any ASA]?"
Samsung AF Slim Zoom w Fojak 400
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
"Who loves ya, baby [at any ASA]?"
Nov 09, 2025 at 10:32 PM
|
p.1 #8$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
This is not scientifical enough. One must shoot a flat wall with a poster of Free Mason symbols to determine how sharp it is in the last .01% of the corner, where all the most important stuff is in a photo.
Nov 10, 2025 at 01:30 PM
p.1 #9$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first. There are people in this group that can accomplish this with no lens, or mechanical shutter plus use a camera body (the box) that resembles a childs' building block. Maybe they could weight in on this comparison.
Nov 10, 2025 at 05:26 PM
p.1 #10$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
James Markus wrote:
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first. There are people in this group that can accomplish this with no lens, or mechanical shutter plus use a camera body (the box) that resembles a childs' building block. Maybe they could weight in on this comparison.
Yeh, comparing two snapshots and claiming the “snapshot camera” is just as good…duh yeh. Throw something challenging and with the snapshot camera…you get, well a snapshot. Nothing wrong with that if that is what one strives for, but some strive for something a bit more challenging,
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first. There are people in this group that can accomplish this with no lens, or mechanical shutter plus use a camera body (the box) that resembles a childs' building block. Maybe they could weight in on this comparison.
Yeh, comparing two snapshots and claiming the “snapshot camera” is just as good…duh yeh. Throw something challenging and with the snapshot camera…you get, well a snapshot. Nothing wrong with that if that is what one strives for, but some strive for something a bit more challenging,
Nov 10, 2025 at 05:56 PM
p.1 #11$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Desmolicious wrote:
madNbad wrote
Desmolicious wrote
Samsung AF Slim Zoom w Fojak 400https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54911633597_6e9c657a08_b.jpg
Leica R9, 50 Summilux w Fojak 200
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54912510811_3e22a3c0f7_b.jpg
It’s good to see Daisy.
Daisy is a cute dog.
Nov 10, 2025 at 06:05 PM
p.1 #12$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
James Markus wrote:
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first.
That’s all the excuse I needed. Another one from the R9:
Wait, what’s that I hear? How about Riley? Fine, here he is via R9 and Lux 50:
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first.
That’s all the excuse I needed. Another one from the R9:
Wait, what’s that I hear? How about Riley? Fine, here he is via R9 and Lux 50:
Nov 10, 2025 at 07:27 PM
p.1 #13$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
I'm guessing if you shot both lenses with a FF 63mp sensor and enlarged the results to 13x19 or larger you might see a difference. But consumer film and web display are a great equaliser.
Nov 11, 2025 at 02:07 AM
p.1 #14$20 p&s vs $2000 Leica
Geoff D F wrote:
I'm guessing if you shot both lenses with a FF 63mp sensor and enlarged the results to 13x19 or larger you might see a difference. But consumer film and web display are a great equaliser.
When I ‘pixel peep’ of course there is no contest. And I don’t need to pixel peep to see that going away from center.
The lens in the Samsung Zoom is good enough for nice pics.
But with any of these p&s cameras, you need to use the fixed focal length ones to get better IQ. And even some of those are lacking. I had a Minolta Prod 20s (styled to kind a look like a Leica) with a 35mm 4.5 that was pretty cr@p.
Whereas the Samsung AF Slim non zoom has a fantastic 35mm 3.5.
The one p&s camera with a great zoom lens is the Rollei QZ 35 series. But those were super pricey.
I'm guessing if you shot both lenses with a FF 63mp sensor and enlarged the results to 13x19 or larger you might see a difference. But consumer film and web display are a great equaliser.
When I ‘pixel peep’ of course there is no contest. And I don’t need to pixel peep to see that going away from center.
The lens in the Samsung Zoom is good enough for nice pics.
But with any of these p&s cameras, you need to use the fixed focal length ones to get better IQ. And even some of those are lacking. I had a Minolta Prod 20s (styled to kind a look like a Leica) with a 35mm 4.5 that was pretty cr@p.
Whereas the Samsung AF Slim non zoom has a fantastic 35mm 3.5.
The one p&s camera with a great zoom lens is the Rollei QZ 35 series. But those were super pricey.
Nov 11, 2025 at 11:08 AM