Just dropping by to this Leica forum which I have read so many Leica users vouching for their camera that will produce true-to-its color.
I’m not so sure how true is that statement, but I tend to believed its more of a false or self-comfort perception because you are paying several hundred dollars more, akin to the notion that a more expensive golf club suppose to lower your score.
I own a FZ50 with Leica lens. I’m not sure whether is there a difference in its production of colors, but even if it has, it should be very subtle.
Good to have such "true-to-its color" camera if one can afford or just simply like the red dot. I also yearn to own one but I believed is no more the deciding factor given the fact that we can PP it in this era (at least the majority people will have access to some kind of photoshop equivalent). To adjust skin tone to its true color is also no more a hassle now. Ben Willmore ( a partime commercial advertisement photographer) said, “I will never produce any images to my client without first going thru photoshop”. Ben has to produce the best image because of his profession. But isn’t it true we hobbists are also trying to produce nice beautiful photos with the best possible colors? I’m not advocating manipulating or twisting the colors or cut and paste the moon. I believed manipulating some basic function like saturation, contrasting, curves and sharpening will not degrade the integrity of the photographer, afterall, the essence of the image must still be captured correctly. Below are 2 examples gone thru PP that markly enhance its coloration.
The original looks dull, dead and lifeless to me. I will not settle for the original photos if taken with a true-to-its color camera, I don’t need such camera as yet but don’t mind if given as a gift. Who doesn't like to own a Leica, but at least I own the lens.
P/S. If you are not with me, at least please like my pic.
http://david-low.smugmug.com/
Original
PP
Original
PP
--
http://david-low.smugmug.com/
I’m not so sure how true is that statement, but I tend to believed its more of a false or self-comfort perception because you are paying several hundred dollars more, akin to the notion that a more expensive golf club suppose to lower your score.
I own a FZ50 with Leica lens. I’m not sure whether is there a difference in its production of colors, but even if it has, it should be very subtle.
Good to have such "true-to-its color" camera if one can afford or just simply like the red dot. I also yearn to own one but I believed is no more the deciding factor given the fact that we can PP it in this era (at least the majority people will have access to some kind of photoshop equivalent). To adjust skin tone to its true color is also no more a hassle now. Ben Willmore ( a partime commercial advertisement photographer) said, “I will never produce any images to my client without first going thru photoshop”. Ben has to produce the best image because of his profession. But isn’t it true we hobbists are also trying to produce nice beautiful photos with the best possible colors? I’m not advocating manipulating or twisting the colors or cut and paste the moon. I believed manipulating some basic function like saturation, contrasting, curves and sharpening will not degrade the integrity of the photographer, afterall, the essence of the image must still be captured correctly. Below are 2 examples gone thru PP that markly enhance its coloration.
The original looks dull, dead and lifeless to me. I will not settle for the original photos if taken with a true-to-its color camera, I don’t need such camera as yet but don’t mind if given as a gift. Who doesn't like to own a Leica, but at least I own the lens.
P/S. If you are not with me, at least please like my pic.
http://david-low.smugmug.com/
Original
PP
Original
PP
--
http://david-low.smugmug.com/
