Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

  1. #1
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Sean's is a paid review site. He just published his comparison of these cameras using LR 4.4 and C1. The resolution winner at low ISO was the DP2M followed by M followe by RX-1. The M and RX-1 were very close. The high ISO winner was the RX-1 easily besting the others to produce cleaner files that retained color and DR over the others. The Fuji did not compete well when using LR 4.4 but did better with C1.
    V/r John

  2. #2
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    My conclusion can be summed up as:

    A couple of things are evident to me from this testing. Unless you require RF Manual focusing and interchangeable lenses, you can do better on the low end with three DPxMs and better on the high ISO end with the RX1 all for far less money. In fact you could have all four cameras for less than the M. The EVF won't compete with the EVF on the RX1 or the EM5 and the long shutter blcak out and shaky magnified image for focusing makes it less than a pleasure as anyone that has tried the older generation EVFs can attest. The M does not appear to offer the leap in IQ that the M9 did at its introduction; however, it is getting harder and harder to separate cameras by IQ as performance improves on the lowest models.
    V/r John
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member jstaben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    I thought the M held up pretty good with the RX1, but also has rangefinder focusing and can use any number of M lenses at all ISO ranges. The RX1 is limited to 35mm. The Sigmas are only good at very low ISO. How is RAW support for Sigma's cams? I'd buy the M in a heartbeat over all those others. You are basically saying you can put all these cameras together and by themselves they each have one advantage over the M. The M, however, has many advantages over each of those individual cameras and also even when you put them all together.

    Horses for courses though...the Sigmas produce a nice image but I sure wouldn't want to live with one. Kind of like having a high maintenance mistress. Nice to look at...but would I want to live with one day in and day out?

  4. #4
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Yes, but the Fuji held up pretty well against the M once he used C1 7.1 instead of LR 4.4 and it has interchangeable lenses and AF that the M doesn't have.

    I guess it boils down to whether you prefer a camera that is pretty good at many things but master of none to a camera that is master of one but only so-so at everything.

    Doesn't mean you get rid of the mistress does it?
    V/r John

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    261
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by barjohn View Post
    Sean's is a paid review site. He just published his comparison of these cameras using LR 4.4 and C1. The resolution winner at low ISO was the DP2M followed by M followe by RX-1. The M and RX-1 were very close. The high ISO winner was the RX-1 easily besting the others to produce cleaner files that retained color and DR over the others. The Fuji did not compete well when using LR 4.4 but did better with C1.
    Was the M9 included in the comparison?

  6. #6
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Image quality has been good enough for me for a few years. At this point, buying a camera is about picking the one I enjoy using the most, which is still an all manual Leica M. That's why I don't plan on even moving up from my M9 to the M240, at least not for IQ's sake.

    p.s. I have gone all in with a Lightroom workflow, so Lightroom compatibility is important to me. No camera is worth changing my entire workflow, at least at this point.
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Now that I have an M and RX-1, for street and other 35mm use I vote for the RX-1 with ease of use, its terrific files, better EVF especially the auto detect and built-in macro .02 to 0.35 meters. Sure it has a fixed 35, but that 35 is a Zeiss/2.0 AND IT IS AUTO FOCUS. (Never had the Zeiss glass on my Hasselblad's left me for wanting) Love the spot AF. The first thing any M user says when I put the RX-1 in their hands is-It feels just like an M. That is no coincidence. Just leave it on Auto and shoot. I set the ISO to 6400 and go at night. Heck on the M after 3200 ISO, it says 4000push, 5000push and 6400push. OK, Jono says it is just fine in the push categories if you respect certain limitations, but frankly, 3200ISO is probably my limit. For high ISO again its the RX-1 and the 5D3.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    Now that I have an M and RX-1, for street and other 35mm use I vote for the RX-1 with ease of use, its terrific files, better EVF especially the auto detect and built-in macro .02 to 0.35 meters. Sure it has a fixed 35, but that 35 is a Zeiss/2.0 AND IT IS AUTO FOCUS. (Never had the Zeiss glass on my Hasselblad's left me for wanting) Love the spot AF. The first thing any M user says when I put the RX-1 in their hands is-It feels just like an M. That is no coincidence. Just leave it on Auto and shoot. I set the ISO to 6400 and go at night. Heck on the M after 3200 ISO, it says 4000push, 5000push and 6400push. OK, Jono says it is just fine in the push categories if you respect certain limitations, but frankly, 3200ISO is probably my limit. For high ISO again its the RX-1 and the 5D3.
    Yeah, that's why Leica is still about essentially one thing to me: enjoying manual rangefinder photography. If one is into EVFs, AF, high ISO, etc., there are better options out there. That's why I'm not sure why Leica is trying to compete in some of these areas.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Agreed, for MF and zone focusing the Leica is still the best alternative but if you want or need AF then the RX-1 is hard to beat as an all around camera with a fixed FL.
    V/r John

  10. #10
    Subscriber Member KurtKamka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    26

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Maybe it's just me, but there's something about RX-1 images that seem rather ho-hum. They just don't wow me. I'm not sold on the new M's files yet either. But, for all of the accolades the RX-1 has gotten, it's still not grabbing me. How's that for an unscientific, unquantifiable opinion?

  11. #11
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Do you own one or have one to shoot with and make that judgement or just from looking at Internet images? Many on the Sony section of this web site are very very good. I don't have the M and can only judge by the images I have seen on the web and I don't see anything that great either. The one camera whose images are stunning at base ISO is the DP2M. Nothing else matches its micro contrast. I just wish the workflow wasn't so bad and the AF was better. I could even live with the high ISO limit of 800 as I would just rely on flash for when I needed more light.
    V/r John

  12. #12
    Subscriber Member KurtKamka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    26

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    That's why I said unscientific ... after all that's what anyone's opinions are worth on an internet forum. Internet opinions and internet images probably should have about the same amount of weight.

    I did, however, spend a few hours with a friend's RX-1. Great functionality, but like I mentioned, the files just didn't do it for me. I also happened to not like the files from the X100 I had but do like the files from my OMD.

    Not that it probably matters at all as, if possible, one should always try what you want to use before purchasing.

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Having shot the M9, MM, and RX1, I must say that I really am enjoying the RX1 for what it is, and find IQ to be fantastic, capable of that elusive POP throughout its ISO range (well, at least through 6400), with malleable files. I find that the files are very robust, with great DR, but the bokeh is relatively tame for a sonnar design (close focus brings out more character)...

    I think it's a fanastic companion alongsie the MM, which is how I am using it now...As said, the Zeiss lens is fantastic, and it will hold its ground with the M sensor, bettering it in some areas and maybe losing out in a few others...
    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Senior Member W.Utsch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    915
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Was waiting for the M. Have lenses and a M8.
    But now, since you could see files in the forums etc i am quite disappointed.
    Like KurtKamka misses something in RX1 i do miss the special quality in the M's files.
    They are good, but nothing sets them apart of the rest (RX1, Canon, Nikon even NEX7) and the DP2M is better at low ISO.
    Getting a M is certainly more than having exceptional IQ but without that its a hard decision.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    I think as we all get better with manipulating images, the difference between A and B will diminish to a point where on the web we will not be able to tell what is what. Even today if EXIF were not available, we might be singing a different tune on certain files versus "our" own go-to first camera.

    Frankly, that is why I print because to me that is where the proof of the pudding stands out.

    Also, onto gear talk, not one non-photographer has ever asked me what camera lenses, etc were used in a certain shot while viewing a print. They do ask where it was taken and that's about it. They either like the print or not.

  16. #16
    Senior Member KeithL's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    832
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    I think as we all get better with manipulating
    Also, onto gear talk, not one non-photographer has ever asked me what camera lenses, etc were used in a certain shot while viewing a print. They do ask where it was taken and that's about it. They either like the print or not.
    The only client who has ever asked me what equipment I use was a camera manufacturer who simply asked me to confirm that I used their equipment.

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    Having shot the M9, MM, and RX1, I must say that I really am enjoying the RX1 for what it is, and find IQ to be fantastic, capable of that elusive POP throughout its ISO range (well, at least through 6400), with malleable files. I find that the files are very robust, with great DR, but the bokeh is relatively tame for a sonnar design (close focus brings out more character)...

    I think it's a fanastic companion alongsie the MM, which is how I am using it now...As said, the Zeiss lens is fantastic, and it will hold its ground with the M sensor, bettering it in some areas and maybe losing out in a few others...
    For me, change that list to M9, and RX1 to X2.

    Am M would be great. So would an MM. But not right away. Need to have my RoBoTs overhauled first. :-)

    G

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Hi There
    Well, lots of good points, but it seems to me that to make a decision between any of these cameras on the basis of image quality would be pretty odd.

    I mean - they're all completely different beasts - it's perfectly clear that they all take decent enough images. In terms of image quality I want a camera that takes decent images.

    If you want a fixed 35mm the RX-1 is obvious - if you like fovean and you want a pocket camera for low ISO only, then the Sigma is excellent. If you want an interchangeable lens AF camera then the Fuji might be your choice (me? I'd rather have an SLR). If you want a rangefinder which takes M lenses, then a Leica is really the only choice.

    I can see that it might be interesting to read Sean's report, but it certainly hasn't taught me anything which would change my mind about which camera to buy.

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    While the files are nice, I have found the communication factors in the new M lacking compared to my iPhone. Certainly I am getting better DoF out of my iPhone. And the M files I find wanting in terms of that iPhone look.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    While the files are nice, I have found the communication factors in the new M lacking compared to my iPhone. Certainly I am getting better DoF out of my iPhone. And the M files I find wanting in terms of that iPhone look.
    It's funny you should mention that - there is certainly a special kind of gleam in the iPhone 5 files which is missing from the 4gs, and certainly nowhere to be seen in the M files.

    On the other hand I've found the pixel to pixel sharpness on the iphone 4gs to have just the edge over the newer phone, and there is an undeniable pop associated with this.

    Just this guy you know

  21. #21
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Not sure what Sean wants to prove with such reviews and comparisons. He rather should stick to reviewing them one by one without comparing. I would never choose any of these cameras based on his opinion!

    WRT the M, there is no other camera so perfectly suited for M lenses. And I would almost bet that the M with any 35 (2 or 1.4) of latest generation simply blows away the RX1 and others based on sheer IQ.

    Having said that - if I wanted a fixed 35 camera, probably the RX1 would be the way to go and in its league it also is the best you can get today.

    WRT Fuji - since they still have issues with their RAW conversions this is simply no longer an option for me. I need something which works from the beginning and do not intend to play beta tester for the next coming years for Fuji.

  22. #22
    Member animefx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Springfield, IL
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    The RX1 is an interesting camera with some good looking files but because it's not a rangefinder and should have fast autofocus for that kind of money. With the Nikon Coolpix A being announced (1.5 crop with 28mm f/2.8 equiv lens) these kinds of cameras should start showing up more over the next couple of years. I hope that Leica's next version of the X has a few different versions. It would be nice to have a faster 28 and 50mm equiv X3. f/2 would be realistic

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    LL quotes from 2009/10: "In the case of the M9 I have no doubt that the combination of the sensor and Leica M lenses is producing image quality that is easily equal to the best that I've ever seen for any camera with the exception of 39MP and 60MP medium format backs, which are also CCD based devices without AA filters." And further: "The World's Smallest, Lightest Full Frame Digital Camera".
    Competition has caught up big time as far as IQ (sensor and lens combo) is concerned and the comparisons done by Sean make sense. Except for the RF experience and the "best platform for m-lenses" the above claims go to other makes in 2013 and future. To me the Leica price premium looks steeper than ever before considering all of that and difficult to rationalize.

  24. #24
    Senior Member jstaben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    Except for the RF experience and the "best platform for m-lenses" the above claims go to other makes in 2013 and future..
    And that's the main reason to buy a Leica (if that's important to you). Not sure why it's so hard to figure out for a lot of folks. Get a NEX/FUJI/whatever if it's not important to you and save a bunch of cash. It's quite simple. It's been the same for decades. Don't buy a Leica body due to some kind of sensor magic. They used the same "sensor" (film) as other much cheaper cameras for years and years. The same quote you had could have been made about film cameras back in 1980. Time to move along and

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by jstaben View Post
    And that's the main reason to buy a Leica (if that's important to you). Not sure why it's so hard to figure out for a lot of folks. Get a NEX/FUJI/whatever if it's not important to you and save a bunch of cash. It's quite simple. It's been the same for decades. Don't buy a Leica body due to some kind of sensor magic. They used the same "sensor" (film) as other much cheaper cameras for years and years. The same quote you had could have been made about film cameras back in 1980. Time to move along and
    Exactly, in the film days, the "sensor playing field" was leveled. The M sensor does not look to play in the same league as today`s leading FF sensors do (without saying it`s not good). Film RF alternatives were available and the Leica price premium by no means as steep as it is today. I bought the M9 (and before the M8) among others because of IQ/size advantage and not only because of the RF experience (the latter alone I can enjoy with a film body).

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    As I said - pick your poison
    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    Exactly, in the film days, the "sensor playing field" was leveled. The M sensor does not look to play in the same league as today`s leading FF sensors do (without saying it`s not good).
    I think you have to define your terms of reference carefully here - if your yardstick is high ISO performance, then I agree, if it's edge performance with retro-focal lenses, then you're wrong, if it's colour out of the camera, then it's largely a matter of taste.

    My contention (and what I personally construe from Sean's report) is that IQ isn't really a limiting factor for any of these cameras - which gives one the freedom to choose the one which suits your style best.

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Comparison such as these will hopefully die out.

    We've reached a watershed in sensor tech in small format. Don't forget with film every camera could have the same sensor, but people still bought Leicas, despite some very excellent alternatives (I have a Fuji Klasse W which is wonderful). In fact, you could put the same film and lens on a Nikon F75 as on a F5 (both outperform a D700 or D3) and people still chose their poison (as Jono says above).

    Now I've got you reading this, it's pretty obvious that bodies are about functionality/ergonomics, lenses are about image quality (not sensors now they're no longer the weak link).

    Finally we might start getting back to some kind normal review that touches on things that matter, if we're really lucky, marketing nonsense like DXOMark will die out.

    My very opinionated post on this.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    74
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    I am not sure why Sean compared these cameras. The sigma DP2M is the one I have tried. It's image quality is great at whatever mp it is supposed to be. That's the end of its positive attributes. Extremely slow start time, worst shot to shot time when shooting Raw (guess 8-10 sec). This is totally unusable in a lot of situations. Well of one is photographing mountains, then sure it may be a good option as mountains rarely move but Leica excels as a photo journalistic, documentary style camera. Even in a posed situation Sigma is worthless due it's slow speed and cumbersome interface. Before anyone asks, yes this is from personal experience.

    Yes another opinionated post, as this seems to be a trend

  29. #29
    Senior Member jstaben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    Exactly, in the film days, the "sensor playing field" was leveled. The M sensor does not look to play in the same league as today`s leading FF sensors do (without saying it`s not good). Film RF alternatives were available and the Leica price premium by no means as steep as it is today. I bought the M9 (and before the M8) among others because of IQ/size advantage and not only because of the RF experience (the latter alone I can enjoy with a film body).
    I agree with Jono this isn't true...except for maybe high ISO. I've got a D800E and my M9P is in the same league just not at high ISO. A lot of these new cams have ISO ratings that are a bit overrated too. RX1 at 12,800 should be called a push and 25,600 is not good at all. I could push the M images in post to that too and it would look bad too. Plus with the RX1 you are limited to f/2...get a lux on the M and the low light ability is equal. Anyway as many have said pick a cam that suits your style buying one based on the sensor is silly we are at a point where cameras are way beyond most people's skill level.

    My MM goes to 10,000 and I find myself rarely needing that. Do you really want to shoot in the dark and have it look like daylight? Not sure what more people are hoping for...somehow ISO 400 film worked for decades. I wonder what people would have discussed back in the day if the Internet had been around.
    http://500px.com/jstaben
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  30. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Yeah, that's why Leica is still about essentially one thing to me: enjoying manual rangefinder photography. If one is into EVFs, AF, high ISO, etc., there are better options out there. That's why I'm not sure why Leica is trying to compete in some of these areas.
    I couldn't agree more. I fear Leica is making a mistake by trying to make a camera that "does everything," but nothing exceptionally well
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean's Comparison of M, RX-1, XPRO-1 and DP2M is up

    Quote Originally Posted by jstaben View Post
    I agree with Jono this isn't true...except for maybe high ISO. I've got a D800E and my M9P is in the same league just not at high ISO. A lot of these new cams have ISO ratings that are a bit overrated too. RX1 at 12,800 should be called a push and 25,600 is not good at all. I could push the M images in post to that too and it would look bad too. Plus with the RX1 you are limited to f/2...get a lux on the M and the low light ability is equal. Anyway as many have said pick a cam that suits your style buying one based on the sensor is silly ..............

    .
    My favorite cameras are the M9 and Sigma DP2M. So high(er) iso is not my thing, except sometimes to keep shutter speed up. However, exactly the Sigma one buys because of three reasons: the sensor, the sensor and the sensor (the lens is excellent too). Why else would one? How silly is that

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •