Toronto, 27 July 2010:
If a rainbow, which only happens to an observer, happens unobserved, is it still a rainbow?
I was amused to see Leica announce recently that they would not be issuing any micro four-thirds lenses. In a recent Popsci blog, Leica’s VP marketing is quoted as saying:
“One reason why we’ve decided not to move into Micro Four Thirds is that we have looked at the sensor size and realized that it cannot produce the image quality that we need. Therefore we decided to stick with the full format in addition to APS-C. It’s all about the ratios”
Interesting. Really? So why is Leica selling rebranded Panasonic cameras at the bottom end?
So let’s see what a real micro four thirds Panasonic, my new GF-1 with fixed 20mm lens, can do against the top of the line Canon, the 1Ds Mark III with a prime 50mm lens. Crazy comparison, eh? Who’d be crazy enough to shoot the same object with a highest-end SLR versus a point and shoot?
I just shot my most patient model in the studio, lit by a couple of Bowens strobes.
So the shots:
Full shot, Canon:
Full shot: Panasonic:
In all cases, click to see a larger picture.
These were RAW images that have been read into Lightroom and edited slightly for white balance and exposure. No sharpening or noise reduction was done.
What does this show me? Yes, I suppose at higher ISOs I’ll see more of a difference, but at these low ISO settings, any megapixel count over ten is “enough”, and the difference in the case of such a controlled shot is minimal.
Certainly, this does not in my opinion warrant the comments by Leica.
While I am not about to hang up my DSLRs, I am impressed by the small camera’s ability to produce professional work.
So to Uncle Fred (and you are not Uncle Fred, or you would not be reading this):
There! Let’s start thinking more about the image than about how we make it.
Get good service, tell a few friends; bad service, tell them all. And that is what I am doing here, in an off-topic post.
Executive summary: Avoid Sears Oakville, and in particular their clock and watch department.
I took my Omega watch in to them a few months ago to have the battery, which had recently finally died after several years, replaced. This is a thin watch and is hard to handle. The last battery was installed there too, but by a watchmaker.
The current manager of the clock department, Nancy Kaye, told me she was not a watchmaker.
That became obvious. She broke my watch. I got it back not working, with the dial turned. She tried again: now completely broken, and the dial dented.
“We have no way of knowing it was working when you brought it in”, she and Sears say. Cost: $350 plus tax. My cost, they say.
So beware, when you bring a perfectly functioning watch (and not a cheap one either) into the clock and watch department at Sears, and they break it, you end up paying, and they wash their hands of it. Implicitly accusing you of lying.
This is not acceptable. My letter to the Better Business Bureau has gone out. Facebook is next. Small claims court too, maybe. Thousands of you now also know that having Sears do anything is taking a huge risk. I assume this will cost them much more than owning up would. I hope so: this kind of running roughshod over the customer is not acceptable.