DMR vs Canon 1DsMkII test on FM forum

[._._z]

Barry, if you follow Doris's history of postings (also listed a Boris Chan) you'll see that

the lip is attached to an experienced, knowledgeable brain.

[jacques_swanepoel]

Jorge, I have read your posting on FM, and do not understand why you were banned. But I do know that some people there can be quite sensitive, as it seems it is the case here.

 

This is my first posting, and no I own no Leica equipment (my father does) and I am a Canon shooter. But I am first and foremost a photographer.

 

It seems some people around here is forgetting that we take photos, not cameras. If you have some bacon to shave, help the Guy (pun intended), do not try and ridicule or be negative. If I didn't know better, I would have thought that this is a peeing contest, and some of you is wondering who is going to blush first.

 

I tell my students to look at forums like these... I tell them to look toward their peers and gurus for answers, etiquette and professional conduct. But this is rediculous. Maybe we should start a forum, and call it equipment-bashing.net

[jorge_torralba2]

Jaques,

 

It is strange how they reacted to my post. I was actually presenting analytical facts and so many were upset that they banned me. No someone does the same and it is praise galore. The forums get uncivil sometimes for no reason thats why I now just post pictures and my experience with cameras rather than risk starting a war over to rival brands. None the less, all I can say about th fm site I will keep to myself.

[doris_chan]

"Doris Chan is only offering lip"

 

Barry, why don't you specify what it is about my "lip" that you're disputing? I thought "lip"

was the whole point of a discussion forum.

 

"what credential does he offer to qualify his opinion as anything but his own animus and

bias???"

 

What difference do my "credentials" make to the technical quality of the images that Guy

has

put up on the linked thread. Even if I've never so much as picked up a camera in my life it

wouldn't alter the fact that the images are of such low technical quality that it would be

foolish to draw any conclusions about the two cameras. There are a number of definitions

for the word "animus" but none of them have any relation to the comments I've made here.

Bias? Bias to or against what? The point that I'm making is that the quality of the "tests"

don't allow for any bias for or against either camera.

 

"Just wondering."

 

Me too. Why not elucidate your own comments?

[guy_mancuso]

Doris please go spend the money and run your own tests than because like I said if you think you are that good technically than prove it with something than bad mouthing me. Is this dpreview here or what. I am on my own clock and do this when I please or have the time I had the camera 3 days and I am going through the process as I said in my thread it is a hot set and we are going through the process of learning the camera. Also do you honestly think I would put up images from clients shoots on the web to steal. I really think you just like to moan, is it you own Canon and don't want to hear something interesting. Frankly you need a life

[guy_mancuso]

Jorge I was gone when you were banned and honestly i never got a reason why and i asked a few folks , not many knew anything at all. it was kinda a shock. To be honest i may be treading on thin ice with this test because it is all about the leica vs a canon on a canon thread so it is not exactly the easiest thing to do and keep the peace because I am trying not to say to much about the Leica and what i am seeing and that is it is very comparable to the 1dsMKII. There are some tests to be done but even the snapshots of a old town the leica is proving a very worthy system and owning all Leica lenses it is much easier to work with and I perfer it. My problem is i am so in tune with the 1dsMKII and it's processing that i can't get the handle with ACR at all and Flexcolor is new. i use C1 and have become very good at it but i am blind to ACR and really do not like the program. So it has become a challenge to run both camera's through ACR because there seems to be some stuff going on in the background and neutral settings is not working like it should. I want to see the RAW file not the embedded profiles of ACR. I also see smearing in ACR with the leica files and in Flexcolor that does not show. I like Flexcolor but it is a tough program to master.There are still some things I want to see like DR and tonal ranges but i need to shoot some interiors withthe lights to see some of the difference and portraits also which I am doing this week , have a busy schedule so hard to do real tesing

[doris_chan]

"Also do you honestly think I would put up images from clients shoots on the web to steal"

 

What is this a reference to?

 

"I really think you just like to moan"

 

You're welcome to think that, but you'd find it harder to justify.

 

"is it you own Canon and don't want to hear something interesting"

 

Yes, I own Canon. I also own Leica M. I'd love to "hear something interesting", but sadly

you're not providing that.

 

"Frankly you need a life"

 

Priceless, coming from the guy responsible for all those pictures of charts and wooden

elks. I have no problem at all with you, or anyone else, running tests on Canons, Leicas,

washing machines or anything else. I'm not sure why you have such a problem with people

pointing out potential shortcomings in those tests. Why be so insecure about it? If you

don't think the comments are fair then explain why rather than childishly goading people

to "get a life". I'm not alone in thinking that "tests" like yours have limited value, it's one of

the reasons that the Galbraith site (one of the few useful tech sites) provided seperate

forums for people like yourself - an awful lot of people found the endless Zeiss v Leica v

Canon threads utterly sterile and pointless. Now everybody's happy at the Galbraith site -

photographers get forums to discuss the issues that matter to them, and the camera club

type get their "lens war" threads.

[maestro logos]

Guy: I have appreciated your comparisons and I'm sure others have too. While the testing

procedure was not perfect in every way, both the extent of the effort and the passion that

you've showed are commendable.

 

Having said that, I should also point out that in time you'll discover this forum has long

been highjacked by a few individuals. These people have the most bizzare sense of

entitlment and contribute nothing other than bitter and virulent remarks. (They also

assume multiple aliases here and on other forums and may well all be the same person.)

I say just ignore them.

[doris_chan]

"They also assume multiple aliases here and on other forums and may well all be the same

person"

 

Maestro, prove you're not me........

[jasper1]

DMR outperforms the Canon quite visibly in terms of color, dynamic range as well as sharpness.

 

Looking at the linked pics it's very hard to draw any conclusions.I agree with Doris and the others the pics are very poor.

[guy_mancuso]

Thanks Maestro

 

Putting up pretty pictures is not the intent at all and not something i am going to do. You want pretty pics look somewhere else. I get paid to take pretty pictures. No one is writing a check for this . The air in here is stale

[._._z]

Maestro is tollsing the old bull chips around. Anyone suspecting someone is using more

than one account can complain to abuse @ photo . net and the IP addresses will be

checked.

 

But that takes the fun away from positing foolish conspiracy theories....

[doris_chan]

"Putting up pretty pictures is not the intent"

 

Guy and Maestro, one last attempt (you'll be pleased to hear) at rationality. The issue isn't

whether the pictures are

"pretty", it's whether they're of sufficient technical accomplishment to be of any

consequence in assessing the relative merits of the two cameras. You and Maestro believe

that they are, I and others believe that they're not. Why does this scepticism upset you to

such an extent? If Maestro didn't want a response then it was foolish of him to post the

link on a discussion forum. If you disagree with my comments then why don't you simply

state your reasons rather than just hurling insults and innuendo around.

 

I don't know how such sensitive souls get through daily life. Try and get a sense of

perspective, you're playing around with two expensive cameras, not working to free the

world of malaria......

[guy_mancuso]

Well I am trying to get to more technical shots but life and work get in the way as I have said I am a working pro and also need to work. I have had it a couple days and have not gone over the deep end really counting the pixels, not sure I really want too. My intent is to see if it competetive the interesting thing is the 10 mpx number seems to be meaningless. Also I have learned a few things the metering on the Leica is damm accurate the metering on the canon with Leica glass is more of a crap shoot and I also since day one just figured out that I am backfocusing on the Leica so there is another curve in the mix . i simply don't have 24 hours to test so this is taking time , i have said that repeatedly and it gets ignored. i am a shooter not a engineer or scientist it is that simple, and i really don't like being bad mouthed over the web for trying something different than Phil Askey or any other equipment tester that is not my goal , it is to simple see certain thinks this camera can offer me as a shooter. So far if not for the focus issue, it is better than the Canon in my mind. I have 2 camera's worth 8 grand each the question is who is going to work best for me. i could care less about the nyquist value or some other scientific bayer layer process. Who cares i need it to produce that is my intent and it just does not sit well with the techies sorry, do it yourself if that is the info you want or call a Leica engineeer and let him explain that stuff to you. If you read your previous posts my friend you started on me and basically said I had no clue on anything , yes go back 20 posts and is it very nice to say something of someone that you do not know who they are or what they do, you can hide behind that keyboard all you want but in my face would you say the same degrading comments, I think not. I have been shooting and making a very good living from this a long long time. I simple don't deserve those kinds of comments, I am the first guy on the web to help someone out when it comes to photography, you can ask anyone that KNOWS me

[._._z]

Yep. A real champ. A prince. Never wrong. Never pats himself on the back, either.

[guy_mancuso]

You certainly add a lot to the photo community. Enough of this crap . Bye

[Brad_]

What Doris is trying to say, and is apparently (and intentionally) being lost here, is that

photos produced speak much stronger and louder than words of accomplishment and

credentials of the author.

 

There is no camera made today (within reasonable limitations of course) that cannot

produce photos good enough for decent viewing over the internet. If technically poor

photos are posted it is due to a basic lack of caring - the fault lying with the

photographer. At that point you have to question the validity of the "test," and whether the

evaluator really knows how to evaluate equipment - either through rigorous unbiased

testing procedures, or through personal real-life usage of a qualitative nature.

 

If somebody posts photos that are technically poor and lacking any care, why should I take

the time to care, and/or attach any credibility to the results? This is a photography forum

after all and that's the way it should be - images talk, BS walks. After-the-fact claims and

credentialing by the evaluator will not rise to a level higher than the care put into the

photos posted.

 

 

There are a few people who time-after-time post technically (and aesthetically) superior

images - Marc Williams, Rich Silfver, and Mike Dixon come to mind. I would value

equipment opinions from those photographers.

[guy_mancuso]

And what i said repeatly is i have not had the chance to do that PERIOD.

 

And anything i have shot is trash now because the leica focus is off and is back focusing. So ask me if i really care what is said. I see neither one of you guys running to help others or posting images of superior quality. There snapshots and i said that and have not had the time but i keep getting bashed along the way.

[aizan_sasayama]

this thread should have moved on to how to do a valid test a long time ago. =)

[Allen Herbert]

I rather like this..........<div></div>

[Allen Herbert]

And this........<div></div>

[Allen Herbert]

How about an Old fashion Canon 10d shot....<div></div>

[Allen Herbert]

Get the picture...have a little think.

[Allen Herbert]

Mr. Herbert

steve swinehart , aug 21, 2005; 10:28 a.m.

"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?

 

I like to see photos not unsupported statements from folk who cannot be bothered or unable to produce decent supporting images.

 

At least you Mr Swinesnide have had the courage to produced some images, however, i feel the Fuji S3 images, i?ve posted, are superior in tonal range and dynamic quality.

[Allen Herbert]

the end not all pixels are equal.

 

So true, So ends the story of Mr Marketing Man and his hype.