• #4865
    Jack MacD

    3200 ISO
    1/15 sec
    f2.0
    braced on a railing.

    In the distance, if you look carefully, you can see the St. Louis Arch

    Attached files

  • #4866
    rofri

    Very well done! I presume you used the S2, but which lens?

  • #4867
    Jack MacD

    rofri,
    I like this particular vantage point in this photo, and I will use my S on it next time.
    While I am an S owner, that shot was with a T. I used the 23mm T lens.

    The T was not targeted at “professional users” The S and M are. But years ago, in say sports, being an amateur was higher praise for someone than being professional. Being an amateur said you did something for the love of it, you didn’t need money to do it. Now of course, being called a Pro is considered higher praise. But I have high praise for the T.

    I bought the T as a big step up from my iPhone. And it is. And it’s capabilities for high ISO and fast shooting far exceed the iPhone. But I try not to “pixel-peep” on it, as I have gotten used to doing that with the S, as I enlarge the S files to huge sizes, and the S files are too amazing.

    So yes, the T was made for the iPhone generation who would prefer Leica quality and luxury, and can rationalize paying twice what the competition charges, but not more. I hope Leica doesn’t mind me having one too.

  • #4872
    Jack MacD

    Ok,
    Kipper always jokingly suggests I do triptychs, so here one is.
    Joe and Gary always suggest B&W so here it is.

    I think if this is going to turn into art for huge display rather than a snap shot, I will have to return and shoot this scene with the S. The noise is showing up just a bit in the B&W version. But the T did a very good job for normal enlargement.

    Attached files

  • #8845
    dalethorn

    That’s some great detail on the church in the foreground, especially given the ISO. The fact that the arch is clear in the background is phenomenal. I set myself some targets for detail more-or-less with the M-Monochrom, and while the T doesn’t equal those (with the 18-56 anyway), it’s close enough for normal viewing distances.

  • #11086
    Jack MacD

    Back in August, I said I would return to this location with the S and reshoot the scene.
    As I did, I realized it would be a better diptych than triptych.

  • #11088
    Jack MacD

    Diptych attached


    Attachments:
  • #11094
    dalethorn

    Hi Jack (never say that at the airport BTW) – the triptch saved at 3.16 mb, while the diptych saves now at only 316 kb, and a small size, so I can’t compare them. It couldn’t be the forum change I don’t think, since I can view the 3.16 mb images at full size now.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.