I don't know if it is the sensor or the lens, but the results I get with the
other lenses I have for the GF-1, 7-14mm, 45mm macro and a Leica 90mm with
adapter, do not produce equally striking results, so I put it down to the
brilliance of the 20mm pancake.
To be fair to film, I have never had as good a scanner as the Nikon 9000. My
film scanner was the Nikon 2000.
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
YNWA
On Oct 4, 2010, at 9:39 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
> It's interesting that you should think that, Nathan. I reckon that the
> pictures on my GF-1 are particularly well exposed and coloured, better than
> those from my E-3 or E-420. I'm definitely no expert, but the sensor must
> have a great deal to do with it, and it tends to point me in the direction of
> the E-5.
>
> Chris
>
> On 4 Oct 2010, at 06:37, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>
>> I think my digital pictures, especially those taken with the M8 and the 20mm
>> lens on the GF-1 are richer and better than anything I did not on color film.
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|