DMR vs Canon 1DsMkII test on FM forum

"Even more interesting is that at merely "10mp" the DMR gives visibly more "effective

resolution" than the Canon's 16mp"

 

And even more interesting than that is that a guy describing himself as a "pro" with two of

the

most expensive cameras on the market seemingly can't match with either the quality that

an average

amateur gets from a $500 digi autoeverything compact. The images on the linked thread

are so startlingly technically inept that it would be foolish to draw any conclusions at all

about the Leica or the Canon. There's no reason to imagine that the Leica won't give OK

quality, but equally there's no real reason yet to imagine it'll be better than (or even as

good as), say, a Canon 20D at a fraction of it's price. On another thread people were

drooling over the "film-like" quality of posted images from the Leica but in reality they

showed nothing that hasn't been available from Canon and Nikon for years. The real

shame is that Leica didn't throw all it's resources at a digi M, if they had then they might

well be

viable again. Good or bad a digi R will struggle in the marketplace just like a film R.

I believe the Nikon D2X gives more "film-like" image quality (especially skin tones) than either the Canon 1ds mk.2 or the Leica DMR.

 

If it were between the Canon and Leica, I'd probably go for the Canon.

 

Having said that, I'm not willing to spend that much money on a digi slr at the moment, so I'll continue shooting film, which I'm completely comfortable with.

"Leica's offering bests the 16~35/2.8L and the 17~40/4L EF zooms, and none of Canons ultra-wide primes fair any better."

 

AFAIK Leica has _no_ offering comparable to either of those lenses, and the closest one, the 21-35, is a slow, variable-aperture lens. And in regards to those primes, let's not forget the price of the 19mm Elmarit and 15mm ASPH, which is more than $6000. Perhaps if Canon felt they could sell at that price, they could match Leica's quality. After all it was Schneider that designed the 15mm ASPH.

 

"Although the DMR lists for under $5k"

 

Only people who pre-ordered prior to April 1 got that price. It is now $6000 or more.

 

"The real shame is that Leica didn't throw all it's resources at a digi M, if they had then they might well be viable again. Good or bad a digi R will struggle in the marketplace just like a film R."

 

I was reluctant to make that point, being a former R owner, but I'm glad someone else did. I am doubtful that no matter how great is the quality of the DMR that more than a handful of people will buy it who aren't already invested in Leica R. Even if that proves true for a digital M also, there are a lot more people invested in that system and a lot less competition in that market niche.

Forget for the moment any actual results. A 16-bit capture can theoretically sample 4096

*times* more colors than a 12-bit capture and thus generating finer color nuances and

better depth. While what that translates to in practice for the DMR remains to be seen, but

at least the potential is there. And for many people, initial results do look very favorable

for the DMR.

 

In the end people probably just perceive colors differently. But that's fine. One thing to

keep in mind though is that the incidence of color vision deficiency in white males is about

8-10%.

"t has very good dynamic range, it's easy to operate

Show me............."

 

Why don't you show yourself and make up your own mind? Take one for a test - instead of posting snide comments?<div></div>

Another DMR photo

Hi gentleman yes I am the guy running the 2 cameras and yes I am a 30 year pro and have been working in the digital realm for at least ten years. What you do not realize is I am trying to make the tests as neutral as posssible . In raw processing i am not even white balancing , whta I am trying to show is what is coming out of the camera and NOT my experience with software. I suggest you READ. This is hard to do is work 2 different systems when the software sucks like ACR, I use C1 for years and It is doing nothing to my Raws in the background, I have used the Flexcolor software and it is very nice BUT to make any test against 2 different system there has to be a standard and ACR is the only software theat can be used by both Oem's. Also to the canon lovers and Leica lovers. I frankly could care lesss if Leica or canon wins and this is not about that , so before spouting off you big mouth actually read what I am trying to do. The Leica so far and for the guy that thinks this is false , go back and look at every image posted . The DMR out of the box is sharper , it's meter is much more accurate, the colors even using the same Leica lenses is coming out nicer on the DMR. Also if you want to attack me and question me than stand in my face and ask instead of assuming I am bias , join FM and ask a question. MY one and only bias is Leica glass after that I don't care what box is in my hand

 

Guy Mancuso

www.guymancusophoto.com

A third DMR photo at ISO 200

"I am trying to show is what is coming out of the camera and NOT my experience with

software"

 

What matters is what each of these cameras can do at it's best with optimum exposure and

RAW processing (which is presumably different for the two cameras), not what each does

at

your "neutral" and equal default settings. It's reasonable to assume that most people who'll

pony up for cameras as expensive as these will be prepared to go to great lengths to

exploit their full potential rather than just slap them on auto for exposure and white

balance.

I actually think the R system may well see a modest turnaround soon. With the current crop

of digital sensors have such high resolving power many people begin to appreciate the

quality of R optics. Go to the FM forum and you'll find many people who have picked up on

(or switched completely to) R lenses. A lot of these people are formerly medium format

shooters who don't need automation and can pay steep prices. The used R market is seeing

quite a boom. Leica also reports that sales in first quarter to be above previous expectation

and up markedly year-over-year.

Doris i do not disagree we should be processing for ultimate quality in whatever works for each camera BUT if you are trying to see the difference of what the outputs are for each camera doe s that sound like a fair comparison. You are misunderstanding some things and that is a fair test to see some of each camera's quality. yes there will be a chance to process for the best possiable , i just have not got there yet and want to get a understanding of what each camera does with Leica glass if you want a different kind a test than look for that kind of test tha someone is doing . i am running a test that compares camera's not what the best image is nut what the camera is capable of doing. just coming in here and giving me the riot act is not going to help at all. YOU need to READ the whole thread and seee what i am trying to do. I am a working photographer not a test lab with scientific equipment

 

Guy

"i am running a test that compares camera's"

 

The problem with that is that all cameras have their idiosyncracies that need to be

overcome before you can use them in a meaningful way. The primary idiosyncracy of

Canon 1 series cameras (film as well as digital) is that their meters suck big time (on

anything other than spot) compared to the competition- I've no idea why this is, but they

do. The fact that photographers put up with this is a sign that they do other things

exceedingly well. Not taking this into account renders any preliminary tests fairly pointless

with regard

to potential image quality.

Well I am finding out the Canon meter is not acurate , This test has helped reveal that so now I can't depend on that at all so now i will try to eliminate it in further testing. I am pulling out the lights and start to work this way because it is much more controlled. Also using Leica glass on both system may be throwing the Canon for a loop but I want to use the same lens because than that adds another variable. my goal is to see how well ultimately the DMR plays on the same field as the Canon 1dsMKII. I have no intentions of selling one afterward . I need both systems for different type of work. I am trying my best that is all I can say and I am not being bias in anyway, I will make mistakes and hopefully catch them but I am not loyal to a name , i am loyal to the Leica lenses and have said that several times. I do think the make the best glass and i have there best 15 2.8,19 2.8, 28 2.8 , 35 2.8 elmarits both of them, 50 summricon, 90 Apo , 21-35 and the 180 F2 APO so at least I have the best glass to try this

<I>The problem with that is that all cameras have their idiosyncracies that need to be

overcome before you can use them in a meaningful way.</I><P>

 

Bingo!<P>

 

Any so-called real-life usage testing done by someone who has not lived with a camera

for at least a couple of months will produce results and conclusions that can best be

characterized as anecdotal.

Okay as a working pro I am supposed to play for a couple months with this to make sure I know what I am doing. Wrong it goes into service 9 am Monday morning to work, I don't have time for BS this thing needs to produce images and make me money. These are tools not toy's. What works better is the question

Guy, Consider yourself lucky :-) If it were me posting this on FM I would have been banned a long time ago. FM'er are a starnge brood. If they disagree with you the complain and you get banned. I am surprised your thread is still aliive. None the less, If I could read the thread in question I would be able to contribute but I cannot post any comments not knowing the facts. I do know that I am very happy with my DMR. Love the colors and ease of use. However its in for repairs now and I dont know when I will get it back. You should stop by dslrx and see my comments and pics in the dmr forum.

"as a working pro I am supposed to play for a couple months with this to make sure I

know what I am doing. Wrong it goes into service 9 am Monday morning to work"

 

Bizarre. I hope for your sake that whoever hires you isn't reading this,

because if they are you might just find that you have all the time in the world for your

camera testing. It doesn't matter if you're working at the top end or you're a bottom feeder

you shouldn't be using equipment for paid work that you don't know inside out.

 

"I don't have time for BS"

 

That's a very questionable statement.

 

"These are tools not toy's"

 

Again, questionable.

Guy this forum being public you do get people coming here to piss at Leica whenever they

get a chance. I say just ignore them.

<I>Guy this forum being public you do get people coming here to piss at Leica whenever

they get a chance.</I><P>

 

Examples?

Doris do you think I am that stupid as to not shoot the Canon as my primary camera to get the job done. The Leica will be there and it will get used but my job for 30 years is to deliver , and I will not be that dumb not to continue that. i get paid to do this and covering my ass is part of the job. I am not going to post here images until I have finals from software that is more usable than ACR it is crap and i need to learn Flexcolor better before I am comforable with real results from it. This is a process that takes some time both camera's and processing. I already have done that with the Canon , this camera was planned four months from now , i just got very lucky to be able to get one in 2 days and no one has tested it once again I am the guinea pig just like the 1dMKII and the 1dsMKII , take the results or don't for what there worth. Please say something postive because your negativity helps no one

Wow, funny how somebody suggested that we learn how to read, and shows that he has to learn how to read too. Good thread, goes well with popcorn.

here is the thread that caused me to be banned :) Not that anyone cares but its funny how now everyone on fm praises the dmr yet a month ago it was unacceptable.

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/252585/0#2095053

Doris-- I don't think Guy is working by the hour, so how he does his shoot is up to him. I

know he doesn't show up to work with one camera body. The testing he's presenting isn't

the most rigorous, but it's not clear that photos of brick walls, Macbeth color checkers,

and resolution charts are useful either. You seem to doubt his credibility as a

professional, perhaps a little web research would have led you to:

http://www.guymancusophoto.com/gallery/index.php

 

Now Guy doesn't come off as the most modest guy on his web site, but he seems to get it

right when it comes to evaluating lenses and camera equipment. He's also very friendly

and helpful.

 

Jorge--Heard about your leg, hope it's healing well. Was the DMR injured in the same

accident, or is it in repair for another problem? Those of us contemplating the DMR want

to know!

I have no dog in this fight, but I can't but help wonder. Guy Mancuso is putting up

information, links to photos etc. while Doris Chan is only offering lip..

My question is what credential does he offer to qualify his opinion as anything but his own

animus and bias??? Just wondering.

Jeff, the dmr was safe and sound in my 52lb back pqack. I wend down sideways and twisted my foot and leg pretty bad. Made it to 8000 feet and had to come down 2000 fett for the airlift. It was all fun and as soon as my foot his back in order I will be shooting for a mt adams climb. Hope the dmr is back from the shop by then. dont know what will take longer to fix a broken foot or a broken dmr :)