An honest question. Why do your files from film always seem so deep and rich when compared to even full frame digital?
Stunning. Simply stunning.
When there is so much conversation these days as far as 'legacy lenses', and since Leica is in no involved in autofocus for their pro gear, WHY won't they market a digital body for all of that R- glass that's still out there?
That would be beautiful with any camera...
Good portrait. Film rules.
Why do photos from the Leica R, the Hasselblad, the Mamiya, et al look so good? IME, it's not film or digital. It's the lenses. Sony may have screwed up the A7/A7r big time, but what they did get right in them are two superb sensors and a great viewfinder. That's all I need—I've got my kit of Leica R lenses that work brilliantly on the A7, and the camera has just enough customizability that I can set it up to work the way I need. With that, I'm done: the photos I'm seeing out of it are as good as what I see out of the Leicaflex SL with the same lenses, which is very very good indeed. The Sony A7, to me, is simply the Leicaflex SL digital surrogate body I've been wanting for the past decade.
One absolutely excellent reason to buy an A7 camera and adapter. The 90mm Summicron and the 80mm Summilux would transform many people's shooting experiences.
Post a Comment