The sky has a magenta cast, David. Is it synthetic? Very nice shot and interesting for me as well as that is the kind of shot I try to take from time to time.
gogopix wrote:
Interesting how these Leicas can draw you away from even MF at times!
Victor
Victor,
I am finding this to be truer than I thought when I took the plunge to MF. Each system has it's strengths and weaknesses. For sheer file size, large printing and the ability to crop heavily and still get a good image MF can't be beat, but this comes at the price of size, weight, slower glass, fewer lens choices, less convenient software, slower workflow due to file size and, frequently, the need to shoot with tripod. The M8 and DMR give me files that seem to me as good as I am getting with MF in a much more convenient package. For those that need fast AF and high ISO neither of these systems compares, IMHO, to the Canon and Nikon offerings. Once Leica works out the kinks in the M8 I suspect it's going to be a very popular camera.
Allen, Joshua, friedrich, jaap...thanks for the kind words. It's hard to convey just how good these files are on web sized images. You can see the colors in the posted image but the surface of the water and the sharpness of the reeds are only hinted at here. I underexposed this shot a bit so as not to lose the sky and, as a result, the grass along the bank was nearly black in the original RAW file. Nevertheless, the detail was there and easily recoverable with some layer and mask work in post processing. No need to take two different exposures and blend them in post, it's all there in the one shot.
David
Before post:
Edited by zaknat on Nov 16, 2006 at 12:25 PM GMT (Reason: clarification)
Cindy Flood wrote:
Nice shot, David. The M8 did a beautiful job of controling the setting sun.
Cindy,
Thanks and I very much agree. Especially since a similar shot taken with my MF gear (shot at ISO 50) resulted in totally unuseable images due to sensor blooming
David
That iswhatis amazing from similar sensors. The Kodak can be well behaved (ex banding :-) o the DMR and M8 butin the phase back can bloom terribly.
Also, for me, the wildlife capability of the R9/DMR and long lenses (1000mm and more) will never be matched by either MF or M8.
Guess I willhave to keep all of them. (except when my family sees idle equpment, I get the "...OH, Isee you are not using xxx, can I......?"
The first part of the explanations seems to be about sensor blooming, not banding. Banding is usually caused by some other systematic source ( like 60HZ due to poor grounding )
The IR parts of the explanation sounds like they just admit that they need a AA filter. Nothing comes for free. They took the risk not to put it in the beginning. Now, it has become more costly.
You have also posted a good example of why shooting RAW with a digital is such a benefit. Imagine being able to go back to old negatives and being able to redevelop them in a different developer years later.
I have the Joseph Holmes Chrome 100 and just quickly playing with Cindy's JPEG (center image) I find that if I convert to that space in PS and assign one of the + profiles it really helps quite a bit. What do you think Guy? Maybe one of the Dcam's would even be better.
cb
CB
I don't know how much the DCam3 will help with the magenta cast but it is definitely the space to use for the M8. The Chrome100 was optimized by Joe for the 4x5 images he scans. The Dcam3 is optimized for files from digital cameras. I just returned from the Digital Printing Summit in Page AZ where Joe was the guest instructor and he spent several lectures on color spaces. This is one brilliant photographer and scientist.
Cindy was commenting on how the P30 Flash Easy Black was a little flat and did not have much punch. I thought the black looked the best in that one of the 3 original ones she posted and was suggesting that a little saturation boost would help and with the Holmes profiles it really works fantastic. I wasn't thinking at all that this would help with the magenta cast but could bring some more pop to the image. Could be a helpful solution for those not using filters.
Did he provide any specific information on the DCam3 vs the DCam 4? I read his site carefully and have been planning on switching but just can't decide if there would be any benefit with one over the other.
Also, I should add, great image Woody, really stunning.
Cindy was commenting on how the P30 Flash Easy Black was a little flat and did not have much punch. I thought the black looked the best in that one of the 3 original ones she posted and was suggesting that a little saturation boost would help and with the Holmes profiles it really works fantastic. I wasn't thinking at all that this would help with the magenta cast but could bring some more pop to the image. Could be a helpful solution for those not using filters.
Did he provide any specific information on the DCam3 vs the DCam 4? I read his site carefully and have been planning on switching but just can't decide if there would be any benefit with one over the other.
Also, I should add, great image Woody, really stunning....Show more →
Yes
he felt that Dcam3 is the right space for digital cameras. The Dcam4 and 5 are very large spaces (the Dcam5 is slightly larger than ProPhoto) and not required for digital cameras. His strategy is to use the smallest (i.e. most optimized) space that will accomodate all the colors in the camera file. For us that means Dcam3
zaknat wrote:
Woody,
I think your M8 has an invisibility cast
David
But as you can see it is possible to change the profile and voila! The image returns.
Anyway, here is the image I was referring to. The shot is from Horseshoe Bend in Page Arizona. Gorgeous place and well worth a trip. Antelope Canyons are very nearby so you get a two for one!
Great shot Woody! Nice to see an actual studyied and composed pic with the M8, using it as you would any other camera. I understand you used an uncoded lens, and no IR filter. Outstanding results.
Best regards
Dave G.
BTW, I thought I would repost Dave's comparison with the crops as equal fractions of the frame. What this makes clear is that the test was a long way from representative and the 1Ds2 had effectively suffered a 23% resolution penalty.
It is my experience that the Canon's can beat or at least equal the Leica's in a test like that -- if you are comparing 100% crops more megapixels are better than less (we're talking about resolution here, not dynamic range or color). But where the Leicas always win, at least in my opinion is the overall image. Lucky for me, I don't sell 100% crops to my clients.
woodyspedden wrote:
But as you can see it is possible to change the profile and voila! The image returns.
Anyway, here is the image I was referring to. The shot is from Horseshoe Bend in Page Arizona. Gorgeous place and well worth a trip. Antelope Canyons are very nearby so you get a two for one!
bigreen505 wrote:
It is my experience that the Canon's can beat or at least equal the Leica's in a test like that -- if you are comparing 100% crops more megapixels are better than less (we're talking about resolution here, not dynamic range or color). But where the Leicas always win, at least in my opinion is the overall image. Lucky for me, I don't sell 100% crops to my clients.
This sounds strange to me. Why should this be the case, please.
Very nice shot and interesting for me as well as that is the kind of shot I try to take from time to time.
Nothing comes for free. They took the risk not to put it in the beginning. Now, it has become more costly.