A comparison. D70 and M6 pics

<p> I am posting two images taken within minutes of each other and within metres

of each other. One taken with Fuji Velvia 100 DL and Leica M6/40mm Nokton f.1.4

and the other with a Nikon D70 and a Sigma Zoom lens at a roughly equivalent

focal length that may a little shorter or longer I am not sure (cannot

remember).</p>

 

<p> When I took the images I did not mean them to be a comparison (I generally

don't do comparison shots as each system had different strengths). I have set

each image to have about the same file size and quality setting and pixel size.

The sharpening is the same on both and the colour is unmanipulated on both. My

apologies for not planning to do a scientific comparison set in advance so

therefore presenting slightly differennt views. </p>

 

<a href=" title="Photo

Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/66/167723071_35f24eb0be_o.jpg"

width="750" height="506" alt="LulworthTestD70/M6compare2" /></a>

 

|

 

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/trevorhare/167723070/" title="Photo

Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/70/167723070_ac4f3f7668_o.jpg"

width="750" height="493" alt="LulworthTestD70/M6compare1" /></a>

clearly, leica wins. :)

Leica suck big time. D70 is the undisputed winner (as always). :-)

Lulworth cove, I presume?

 

Let's see a 100% crop then... maybe of the biggest boat?

If this is an informal comparison, tell us what scanner you used.

Shouldn't this be film vs digital? A fair comparison would be the D70 (or 200) with the DMR (made by Leica).

No doubt about it, the Leica roundness and glow just jump right off the monitor, in fact if I hadn't ducked I think it would've broke my nose :*)

The colour is more pleasing on bottom photo, however, I suspect the colour

on top photo is more correct. So, unless I missed something, which is which

(yeah, I know, I should be able to tell the difference, but I readily admit I can't,

but if I had to make a decision I would suspect the top photo is with the Leica

and 40 because it seems just a tad sharper)?

ummm, ok... I assume the top image is Leica (looks a bit sharper, less contrast).

It's as if a filter was used on the top image. Which has mor vignetting than the second btw.

I'm guessing the bottom image was traken with film (marginal grain apparent in the sky?????), but I find it difficult to tell on this occasion.

 

I often seem to prefer the look of digital for screen images. The qualities of film sometimes get lost in translation.

 

Unless I have also missed something, which is which?

Both are good. I like the top image best.

 

Michael J Hoffman

Kind of pointless.

 

If I shot two images, one with a prime (canon, leica, nikon) vs a third party superzoom I'd be surprised if the prime DIDN'T win. film vs digital or camera brand would be irrelevant.

 

So, clearly, this is just another opportunity for Leica users to PooPoo the rest of us and pat themselves on the back for how "clearly" superior they are.

 

Have fun guys.

" So, clearly, this is just another opportunity for Leica users to PooPoo the rest of us and pat themselves on the back for how "clearly" superior they are."

 

Ah, make that C-V Nokton users vs the Sigma zoom users.

<p> Another pair. Again M6 TTL/Nokton 40mm f/1.4 Velvia 100 DL and Nikon Coolsc V and Nikon D70 + 18-50mm f/2.8 Sigma EX DC in no particular order. </p>

 

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/trevorhare/167764547/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/65/167764547_899e59da00_o.jpg" width="511" height="769" alt="LulworthTestD70/M6compare3" /></a>

 

|

 

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/trevorhare/167764546/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/72/167764546_f8729f393f_o.jpg" width="511" height="766" alt="LulworthTestD70/M6compare4" /></a>

No significant difference. Except maybe the price.

Or was that the point?

Due to an elemental error on my part that last pair is dead easy to work out :)

On the original post it's obvious the top post is FILM, it has more dynamic range.

 

Gerry

No idea which is which, but I prefer the top one in both instances.

 

What is the answer?

The Bokeh is exquisite on the top picture. You can enlarge and read the registration

number on the right hand boat (starboard side :-) ) and also the all important underwater

wildlife.

 

All I can say about the lower image is, that's a smit tee shirt he's wearing. Purely a record

shot.

Trevor, thank you for taking the time to post these. As you know, you cannot win when you do these things. All the "armchair quarterbacks" come out of the woodwork. Interesting that on the original images, you can see the bottom of the cove (?) on the top image while the lower image has more saturation. Would manipulating the top image for more saturation result in the loss of the bottom resolution? Just throwing this out for your speculation and maybe something for you to try.

Thomas, Look a bit more carefully, but this time imagine it's your $5k just spent on the

lens.

 

p.s. Your answer is wrong .

I wonder why so much more is visible below the water in the first photo. Is it only a matter of camera, scanner and Photoshop settings?

Too much guano and nitrates in the 2nd pics:)