instant.human Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 It certainly will give you better pictures with less noise. Isn't that comparing it though? Sure, the cameras are geared toward different groups but you can still compare low light performance. no, not really. because with a leica youd most likely not go out and set up a lightning and get your models ready and play around with light and shadow. you most likely go out and shoot a concert or that guy sitting over there in the bar. if youd really use a leica for studio-like photography, you could compare it. but i really cant think of anyone who does that. a rangefinder just isnt fun in the studio. ;) plus, while the 5dII might be great for low light, the noctilux is out for avalible light, which is a huge difference. both deals with low light but avalible light is a little harder to make good pictures of. you wont have a tripod most of the time, you take pictures of rooms only lightned by candles or whatever... you see what i mean, i hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premgenius Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 very impressive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Charming Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 You're comparing a lens (Noctilux, 50mm F/0.95, 1.0) to a camera (5D MKII, 21mpx FF camera). As for low light and available light, that's determined by lens aperture AND the camera's light sensitivity. The Canon 50mm F/1.0L lens can be found for some disgusting prices with an aperture that pretty much matches the Noctilux's, so the lens already exists for available light for the 5D MKII. And the 5D MKII will have significantly cleaner images at higher sensitivities. Film gets grainy, fast. ISO3200 would not be pretty - the 5D MKII keeps it very controlled. So yeah, the 5D MKII does available light pictures considerably better than the M6 + Noctilux. Not saying it's a bad camera and I'd love to own a Leica, but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Symons Veteran Posted September 22, 2008 Veteran Share Posted September 22, 2008 Amazing stills. Crazy considering that's from a video :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
instant.human Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 You're comparing a lens (Noctilux, 50mm F/0.95, 1.0) to a camera (5D MKII, 21mpx FF camera). As for low light and available light, that's determined by lens aperture AND the camera's light sensitivity. The Canon 50mm F/1.0L lens can be found for some disgusting prices with an aperture that pretty much matches the Noctilux's, so the lens already exists for available light for the 5D MKII. And the 5D MKII will have significantly cleaner images at higher sensitivities. Film gets grainy, fast. ISO3200 would not be pretty - the 5D MKII keeps it very controlled.So yeah, the 5D MKII does available light pictures considerably better than the M6 + Noctilux. Not saying it's a bad camera and I'd love to own a Leica, but still. no im not. ;) im comparing a leica with a noctilux. sorry i didnt always write that entire sentence. after all its nothing to argue about. ;) i just said that a leica is still great for avalible light. i didnt say the 5dII is not. maaan. =) you guys really get furious fast! however, i for myself like grainy film pictures. that may be just me, i know and im very, very sorry for implicating that everyone should love that aswell. that was wrong. yes, the 5dII sure is great for avalible light. and sure it will beat a leica /w noctilux. i was just saying that IMHO nothing beats the leica in terms of aesthetics. ;) but i shouldnt have done this because that is a matter of taste. im very sorry. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts