Hmmm,
There are "class" of people that just cannot be satisfied with *Generic* stuff, like Toyota, Microsoft and Canon. They have got to use BMW, Apple and Leica.
However, picking on IE for the "conformance" is way too extreme. It is the most adopted web browser at the of the day.
Pondria wrote:
Hmmm,
There are "class" of people that just cannot be satisfied with *Generic* stuff, like Toyota, Microsoft and Canon. They have got to use BMW, Apple and Leica.
Hey Pondria, how did you know my taste ?
Although I assure you that's it's all about performance, not "class"... sure they are expensive, but it's too easy to dismiss these brands as classy, maybe without actually have used them...
And please don't put Canon and Toyota along with Microsoft !
One problem I find with exploder (from the point of view of someone who makes most of his living from developing Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP applications for web and intranet) is that if a picture fails to load, exploder keeps the unloadedness of the image in cache and remembers not to load it next time. If that's your problem here then "Menu:Tools:Options:Delete all [cache] files" should fix it. I probably don't need to say that it's a terribly shoddy and broken implementation of the sort in which that vendor specialises.
DaveEP wrote:
Being the mostly adopted may make it the defacto standard, but it does not mean that is actually conforms to the "official" standards.
Quite true. Microsoft often sets it own standards (especially with IE) to limit ineroperability so that they other product don't appear to work properly when confronted with something particular to Microsoft. It can get away with doing this becuase of it's monopolistic position in the market.
Pondria wrote:
Hmmm,
There are "class" of people that just cannot be satisfied with *Generic* stuff, like Toyota, Microsoft and Canon. They have got to use BMW, Apple and Leica.
I'd say that "class" of people represents most of the consuming public and involves commodities ranging from cereal to bluejeans. In many cases those folks pay a huge premium for branding where there is little or no difference in quality, e.g. a nylon backpack from Prada can set you back $400 or, forgive me Guy, Manolo Blahnik shoes . I don't think that's the case with case with camera gear, e.g. Leica or Zeiss glass vs some of the more poplular brands. Whether the premium is "worth it" is an individual choice we all make and is dependent, to a large extent, on our individual values. To me a Leica MP is worth it's premium price, to another it's not. No right or wrong decision here. Seems like many of us spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince the others of the correctness of their values... almost always unsuccessfully.
The more time passes, the more I find myself spending more on less.
Anyway, my M8 hasn't returned yet, but I am developing my pictures from my Egypt trip last month, and wanted to post a 5D shot with the Summilux-R 80. Clearly with the right glass, the 5D is capable of some pretty astounding sharpness. Full shot and 100% crop. Let the M8 owners with camera in-hand post some comparisons, if anyone is interested in pixel-level sharpness, regardless of resolution.
I have other shots where the DR falls a bit short. Egypt is a great place to test DR I also have to fiddle with the colour a little more than I prefer. But all told, both the 5D and the DMR are in the top 5 cameras in the world today, in my opinion, so neither is a loser. I did get some shots with the 5D which the DMR would have butchered, due to its high ISO. I wish I had received the M8 in time to take it to Egypt.
nice eye for color.
the image above actually benefits in my mind from the strong orange /blue contrast, but it seems you may had needed to boost the saturation. If I remember the 5D can be a little flat on color,
gogopix wrote:
I must say, the more I see of the 5Dwith Leica glass the better it looks,
say again where the DMR was better?
I am sure DR is one area, but DR looks pretty good in the above image
This is what I think, too.
There are 3 things that affect the image big time - Lens, Sensor and RAW converter.
We all know about the Leica and Zeiss lenses.
For sensors, I honestly feel that there are mixed bag of facts and myth. I just don't see any one sensor is superior to another. It is more of preference.
RAW converters are different story. They have, IMO, much bigger impact than most people think. Correct calibration, profiling are necessary but often ignored.
