NO PICTURES! NO PICTURES!

nice photo!

Perhaps we could organize a flash mob in protest...of course DesMoines is a bit far from me, can someone stand in for me?

Copyright a building? Where I live there's a tree that is copyrighted! No Kidding.

BTW, nice photo.

I'm quite interested in your Leica experience because I'm hoping to soon get some Leica glass. Do you use medium format at all? I have read that while yes, Leica is great, almost any MF will give you greater quality. Can you comment based upon experience on this?

As for the copyrighted building, if indeed it is copyrighted, you should still be able to photograph it, you just cannot publish an image of it for profit, no?

Frank,

I have only shot 4 rolls of film with the Leica so far. 2 rolls of Ilford XP2 super, 1 roll of Fuji ACROS 100, and 1 roll of Kodak 400 TMAX.

I also shoot Medium format with a Hasselblad and Pentax 645.

I very rarely print larger than 8x10. In fact I have NOT printed anything from the Leica larger than 8x10 yet.

I gave up on 35mm years ago because I was not happy with the print quality I was getting.

This is my impression of the Leica so far.

WOW! The quality of the 8x10\'s that I have printed so far is just as good as the 8x10\'s that I have printed from the Hasselblad or Pentax.

The photo above is a perfect example. I have never achieved such print quality from a 35mm negative before.

Years ago when I was shooting 35mm the films I use now where not available. Could part of the improvement be the film? Could be..............

Could part of the improvement be that I am a better printer now than I was years ago? Could be...............

Could part of the improvement be the Leica Glass? Could be........... I do think that the prints from the Leica have a different \"Look\" to them.

I honestly think that it is a combination of all 3.

Things could be different when I print something 11x14 or larger. I haven\'t tried that yet.

I can say that I am very, very happy with the Leica.

If you (or anyone) are interested I would be happy to \"Swap\" a copy of this print for one of yours so that you can see for yourself.

Jim

I use Leica lenses a f2 90 mm APO Summicron and 35mm f2 APo summicron on a M7 and the results ( with proper processing) are truly stunning.
I am just printing some Fuji Acros to 20" x 16" and they are very sharp and almost grain free.

Let's do the math. A 35mm negative needs about twice the enlargement of a MF negative. As long as the 35mm has twice the resolution of a MF, there shouldn't be a difference, regardless of print size. Does a Leica lens have twice the resolution of a Hasselblad lens? Of course, if the magnification is small, neither negative will be enlarged enough to reach the threshold of human detection (7 lp/mm) and the prints from both cameras will look identical. This is why many see a huge difference between 35mm and MF but don't see an improvement when moving to LF. They don't make prints large enough to see the difference!